
1 I hi lilt I 



iMliii nil 
n n»!HStHf»Hii:l Hit 
i II IHilJinlliif i'l vl\ 



mm . 






|i fill |}i|^*" 

'"-i! I jiin'H'iHniiiuuniiuiiinril 
i ll 1 



j jUliiillliilHUU I 




mm 




Class _l=ji^ 
Bonk . ^ 1 



Oi 



Gopight}!". 



1 



COPVRIGHT DEPOSnV 



ECLECTIC ENGLISH CLASSICS 

LINCOLN 

II 

ADDRESSES AND LETTERS 



EDITED BY 

CHARLES W. MOORES, Litt.D. 



AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY 

NEW YORK CINCINNATI CHICAGO 



/9H 



Copyright, 1914, by 
AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY. 



LINCOLN, ADDRESSES AND LETTERS. 

w. p. I 



MAY -5 1314 



©CI.A369942 

^ f 



CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Introduction 7 

Autobiography written at the request of a friend as the basis 

OF a campaign biography, June, i860 9 

From a handbill announcing his legislative candidacy, 1832 . 18 

Letter to George Spears [1833 ?] 21 

Announcement of his platform as a candidate for the legisla- 
ture, 1836 22 

Letter to W. G. Anderson, Oct. 31, 1840 23 

Letter to John T. Stuart, Jan. 23, 1841 24 

Letter to Miss Mary Speed, Sept. 27, 1841 .... 25 
Extracts from a letter to George E. Pickett, Feb. 22, 1842 . 27 
From an address before the Springfield Washingtonian Tem- 
perance Society, Feb. 22, 1842 29 

Letters to Joshua F. Speed, Feb. 25, 1842; July 4, 1842 . 31 

From a letter to Martin S. Morris, March 26, 1843 . . 34 

Letter to Williamson Durley, Oct. 3, 1845 • • • • 35 

Verses, April, 1846 38 

From a letter to William H. Herndon, Jan. 8, 1848 . . 40 
Letter to William H. Herndon, Feb. 2, 1848 . . . -41 

Letter to Josephus Hewett, Feb. 13, 1848 42 

Letters to William H. Herndon, June 22, 1848; July 10, 1848 43 
From a speech in Congress, July 27, 1848, on the candidacy of 

Zachary Taylor for President 45 

Letter to Hon. John M. Clayton, July 28, 1849 ... 49 

3 



4 CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Memorandum for law lecture, 1850 50 

Letters to John D. Johnston, Jan. 2, 1851 .... 53 

Letter TO John D. Johnston and to his mother, Nov. 4, 1851 55 
Speech in reply to Senator Douglas at Peoria, Oct. 16, 1854 56 
From a letter to George Robertson of Lexington, Kentucky, 

Aug. 15, 1855 

From a letter to Joshua F. Speed, Aug. 24, 1855 

From a letter to Isham Reavis, Nov. 5, 1855 . 

Letter to Richard P. Morgan, Feb. 13, 1856 

Letter to J. A. Brittenham, Sept. 17, 1856 

Autobiography, compiled for the " Dictionary of Congress," 

June, 1858 

Speech accepting the nomination to the United States Senate, 

June 16, 1858 — the " House Divided" speech 
From a speech at Springfield, Illinois, July 17, 1858 
From the debate v^ith Stephen A. Douglas; speeches deliv- 
ered AT QuiNCY, Oct. 13, 1858 

Mr. Lincoln's rejoinder at Quincy 

From the speech at Alton, on Oct. 15, 1858; the last of the 

formal debates with Douglas 

Letter to James T. Thornton, Dec. 2, 1858 

Letter to Thomas Johnson Pickett, April 16, 1859 . 

Autobiography written for Jesse W. Fell, Dec. 20, 1859 

Speech at Cooper Institute, Feb. 27, i860 .... 

Letter to "Professor" Gardner, Sept. 28, i86o 

Letter to Grace Bedell, Oct. 19, i860 .... 

Letter to William S. Speer, Oct. 23, i860 .... 

Letter to Peter Page, Jan. 21, 1861 

The farewell at Springfield, Illinois, Feb. ii, 1861 

From a reply to the address of welcome at Indianapolis, 

Feb. II, 1861 

Address to the Ohio Legislature at Columbus, Feb. 13, 1861 
Speech at Utica, New York, Feb. 18, 1861 



CONTENTS 

From the address to the New Jersey Senate, at Trenton, 

Feb. 21, 1861 

From an address to the Assembly of New Jersey, Feb. 21, 1861 
Address at Independence Hall, Philadelphia, Feb. 22, 1861 
First inaugural address, March 4, 1861 .... 
Secretary Seward's suggestions entitled : " Some thoughts 

for the President's consideration," April i, 1861 
Letter to Colonel Ellsworth's parents. May 25, 1861 . 
Proclamation of a national fast day, Aug. 12, 1861 . 
Letter to Mayor Ramsey, Oct. 17, 1861 .... 
Memorandum : Suggestions to the widow of Stephen A. DouG' 

LAS, Nov. 27, 1861 

Letter to Major General David Hunter, Dec. 31, 1861 . 
Letter to Secretary Stanton, Jan. 22, 1862 
-Speech to the Twelfth Indiana Volunteers, May 15, 1862 
Letter to Reverdy Johnson, July 26, 1862 
Letter to Cuthbert Bullitt, July 28, 1862 
Letter to Horace Greeley, -Aug. 22, 1862 .... 
Meditation on the will of God, September, 1862 
Telegram to Major General McClellan, Oct. 24, 1862 . 
Order for Sunday observance, Nov. 15, 1862 
Letter to General Carl Schurz, Nov. 24, 1862 
From the annual message of Dec. i, 1862, recommending com 

pensated emancipation 

Letter of thanks to the Army of the Potomac, after the 

DEFEAT at FrEDERICKSBURG, DeC. 22, 1862 

Letter to Miss Fanny McCullough, Dec. 23, 1862 . 
Emancipation Proclamation, Jan. i, 1863 .... 
Letter to THE workingmen of Manchester, England, Jan. 19, 1863 
Letter to General Joseph Hooker, Jan. 26, 1863 
Letter to General William S. Rosecrans, March 17, 1863 
Telegram to General Joseph Hooker, June 10, 1863 
Telegram to General Joseph Hooker, June 14, 1863 



5 

PAGE 



CONTENTS 



CEMETERY AT 



March 1 8, 1864 



Letter to General Grant, July 13, 1863 . 
From a letter to Mrs. Lincoln, Aug. 8, 1863 
Letter to James H. Hackett, Aug. 17, 1863 
Letter to James C. Conkling, Aug. 26, 1863 
Memorandum, Sept. 26, 1863 .... 
Address at the dedication of the national 

Gettysburg, Nov. 19, 1863- 
Address to General Grant, March 9, 1864 
Address on closing the sanitary fair, Washington, 
Letter to Albert G. Hodges, April 4, 1864 
Telegram to Mrs. Lincoln, April 28, 1864 . 
Letter to General U. S. Grant, April 30, 1864 
Speech in response to a delegation from the National Union 

League, June 9, 1864 

Telegram to General U. S. Grant, Aug. 17, 1864 

From a speech to the i66th Ohio volunteers, Aug. 22, 1864 

Memorandum, Aug. 23, 1864 .... 

From a response to a serenade, Nov. 9, 1864 

Letter to Mrs. Bixby, Nov. 21, 1864 . 

Letter to Deacon John Phillips, Nov. 21, 1864 

Memorandum, Dec. 3, 1864 .... 

Response to a serenade, Dec. 6, 1864 . 

Letter to General William T. Sherman, Dec. 26, 1864 

Letter to Dr. John Maclean, Dec. 27, 1864 

Letter to General U. S. Grant, Jan. 19, 1865 

The second inaugural address, March 4, 1865 

Letter to Thurlow Weed, March 15, 1865 

The last public speech, April ii, 1865 

Bibliography 



INTRODUCTION 

One who appreciates the Gettysburg address and the two 
inaugurals is not content unless he can go further. There 
is much in Lincoln's writings of the highest literary quality. 
There is much more that justifies the student of American 
history in continuing his study of Lincoln. In the prepara- 
tion of this collection the editor has had in mind the chief 
value which it should possess for the reader. That value is 
to be found in the revelation which his writings give of the 
personality of one of the greatest public characters in all 
history. So those speeches and letters have been chosen 
which reveal the most of the man, Lincoln. With this in 
view, the notes are meant to explain the man and the occa- 
sion, and with the letters give such information as will 
enable the reader to understand better why the letters were 
written and who Lincoln's correspondents were. The few 
obvious errors in grammatical or rhetorical form are not 
noted. The *' split infinitive" is one of Lincoln's com- 
monest failings, but the critical student can find better use 
for his time than in hunting for faults. 

The autobiography with which the volume opens gives us 
the man's own story and his own modest estimate of himself. 
It should be read with the other two autobiographies which 
the book contains. To these may be added the following 
facts: Lincoln was a candidate for senator in 1854 as an 
anti-Nebraska Whig, but was defeated by Lyman Trumbull. 
In 1858 he was again a candidate for the senatorship to suc- 
ceed Stephen Arnold Douglas, the Democratic leader. In 
this campaign he debated the slavery question with Douglas 
in every part of Illinois. Lincoln's party won a popular 
majority, but Lincoln was defeated because of inequalities 

7 



8 INTRODUCTION 

in the legislative apportionment. He made political speeches 
in 1859 and i860, still answering Douglas, in Kansas, Iowa, 
Ohio, and New York, and in May, i860, was nominated for 
President by the Republican national convention. He 
carried nearly all of the northern states and, the Democratic 
party being divided, was elected. He was renominated at 
Baltimore in 1864 by a convention of "unconditional Union 
men,'' many of whom were Democrats, and was reelected 
almost unanimously. He was shot by an assassin at Ford's 
Theater, in Washington, on April 14, 1865, and died the next 
morning. 

Some idea of his appearance may be had from his auto- 
biography written in December, 1859 (see page no) : "I am, 
in height, six feet four inches, nearly, lean in flesh, weighing 
on an average one hundred and eighty pounds, dark com- 
plexion, with coarse black hair and gray eyes. No other 
marks or brands recollected." 

The best estimates of his character and ability are in the 
monumental history by his secretaries Nicolay and Hay, the 
essays of James Russell Lowell, Carl Schurz, and Richard 
Watson Gilder, and the orations of Joseph H. Choate, Robert 
G. Ingersoll, Henry Watterson, Phillips Brooks, George 
Bancroft, and Henry Ward Beecher. 

So far as the editor can discover, the letter to J. M. Clay- 
ton, dated July 28, 1849, the letter to J. A. Brittenham, dated 
September 17, 1856, the letter to Peter Page, dated January 
21, 1861, and the memorandum about General Negley, dated 
September 26, 1863, have never before been published in any 
collection of Lincoln's writings. Most of the letters and tele- 
grams included in this volume are used through the courtesy 
of the Century Company, publishers of Nicolay and Hay's 
"Abraham Lincoln : Complete Works," and by special ar- 
rangement with that company. Acknowledgment is also made 
to Doubleday, Page & Company for permission to use the 
quotation from "Reminiscences of Carl Schurz," on page 176. 

CHARLES W. MOORES. 



LINCOLN 

ADDRESSES AND LETTERS 

AUTOBIOGRAPHY WRITTEN AT THE REQUEST OF A FRIEND 
AS THE BASIS OF A CAMPAIGN BIOGRAPHY, JUNE, i860 

Abraham Lincoln was born Februar}^ 12, 1809, then in 
Hardin, now in the more recently formed county of La Rue, 
Kentucky. His father, Thomas, and grandfather, Abraham, 
were born in Rockingham County, Virginia, whither their 
ancestors had come from Berks County, Pennsylvania. His 
lineage has been traced no farther back than this. The 
family were originally Quakers, though in later times they 
have fallen away from the peculiar habits of that people. 
The grandfather, Abraham, had four brothers — Isaac, 
Jacob, John, and Thomas. So far as known, the descendants 
of Jacob and John are still in Virginia. Isaac went to a place 
near where Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee join ; 
and his descendants are in that region. Thomas came to 
Kentucky, and after many years died there, whence his de- 
scendants went to Missouri. Abraham, grandfather of the 
subject of this sketch, came to Kentucky, and was killed 
by Indians about the year 1784. He left a widow, three 
sons, and two daughters. The eldest son, Mordecai, re- 
mained in Kentucky till late in life, when he removed to 
Hancock County, Illinois, where soon after he died, and where 
several of his descendants still remain. The second son, 
Josiah, removed at an early day to a place on Blue River, 
now within Hancock County, Indiana, but no recent informa- 
tion of him or his family has been obtained. The eldest 
sister, Mary, married Ralph Crume, and some of her de- 
scendants are now known to be in Breckinridge County, 
Kentucky. The second sister, Nancy, married William 
Brumfield, and her family are not known to have left Ken- 

9 



lO AUTOBIOGRAPHY 

tucky, but there is no recent Information from them. 
Thomas, the youngest son, and father of the present subject, 
by the early death of his father, and very narrow circum- 
stances of his mother, even in childhood was a wandering 
laboring-boy, and grew up literally without education. He 
never did more in the way of writing than to bunglingly 
write his own name. Before he was grown he passed one 
year as a hired hand with his uncle Isaac on Watauga, a 
branch of the Holston River. Getting back into Kentucky, 
and having reached his twenty-eighth year, he married 
Nancy Hanks — mother of the present subject — in the year 
1806. She also was born in Virginia, and relatives of hers of 
the name of Hanks, and of other names, now reside in Coles, 
in Macon, and in Adams Counties, Illinois, and also in Iowa. 
The present subject has no brother or sister of the whole or 
half blood. He had a sister, older than himself, who was 
grown and married, but died many years ago, leaving no 
child ; also a brother, younger than himself, who died in 
infancy. Before leaving Kentucky, he and his sister were 
sent, for short periods, to A B C schools, the first kept by 
Zachariah Riney, and the second by Caleb Hazel. 

At this time his father resided on Knob Creek, on the road 
from Bardstown, Kentucky, to Nashville, Tennessee, at a 
point three or three and a half miles south or southwest of 
Atherton's Ferry, on the Rolling Fork. From this place 
he removed to what is now Spencer County, Indiana, in the 
autumn of 18 16, Abraham then being in his eighth year. 
This removal was partly on account of slavery, but chiefly 
on account of the diflRculty in land titles in Kentucky. 
He settled in an unbroken forest, and the clearing away of 
surplus wood was the great task ahead. Abraham, though 
very young, was large of his age, and had an ax put into his 
hands at once ; and from that till within his twenty-third 
year he was almost constantly handling that most useful 
instrument — less, of course, in plowing and harvesting 
seasons. At this place Abraham took an early start as a 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY II 

hunter, Vvhich was never much improved afterward. A few 
days before the completion of his eighth year, in the absence 
of his father, a flock of wild turkeys approached the new log 
cabin, and Abraham with a rifle-gun, standing inside, shot 
through a crack and killed one of them. He has never since 
pulled a trigger on any larger game. In the autumn of 1 8 18 
his mother died ; and a year afterward his father married 
Mrs. Sally Johnston, at Elizabethtown, Kentucky, a widow 
with three children of her first marriage. She proved a good 
and kind mother to Abraham, and is still living in Coles 
County, Illinois. There were no children of this second 
marriage. His father's residence continued at the same 
place in Indiana till 1830. While here Abraham went to 
ABC schools by littles, kept successively by Andrew 

Crawford, Sweeney, and Azel W. Dorsey. He does 

not remember any other. The family of Mr. Dorsey 
now resides in Schuyler County, Illinois. Abraham now 
thinks that the aggregate of all his schooling did not amount 
to one year. He was never in a college or academy as a 
student, and never inside of a college or academy building till 
since he had a law license. What he has in the way of edu- 
cation he has picked up. After he was twenty-three and had 
separated from his father, he studied English grammar — 
imperfectly, of course, but so as to speak and write as well 
as he now does. He studied and nearly mastered the six 
books of Euclid since he. was a member of Congress. He 
regrets his want of education, and does what he can to supply 
the want. In his tenth year he was kicked by a horse, and 
apparently killed for a time. When he was nineteen, still 
residing in Indiana, he made his first trip upon a flatboat to 
New Orleans. He was a hired hand merely, and he and a son 
of the owner, without other assistance, made the trip. The 
nature of part of the ''cargo-load," as it was called, made it 
necessary for them to linger and trade along the sugar-coast ; 
and one night they were attacked by seven negroes with 
intent to kill and rob them. They were hurt some in the 



12 AUTOBIOGRAPHY 

melee, but succeeded in driving the negroes from the boat, 
and then "cut cable," "weighed anchor," and left. 

March i, 1830, Abraham having just completed his twenty- 
first year, his father and family, with the families of the two 
daughters and sons-in-law of his stepmother, left the old 
homestead in Indiana and came to Illinois. Their mode of 
conveyance was wagons drawn by ox-teams, and Abraham 
drove one of the teams. They reached the county of Macon, 
and stopped there some time within the same month of 
March. His father and family settled a new place on the 
north side of the Sangamon River, at the junction of the 
timberland and prairie, about ten miles westerly from 
Decatur. Here they built a log cabin, into which they 
removed, and made sufficient of rails to fence ten acres of 
ground, fenced and broke the ground, and raised a crop of 
sown corn upon it the same year. These are, or are supposed 
to be, the rails about which so much is being said just now, 
though these are far from being the first or only rails ever 
made by Abraham. 

The sons-in-law were temporarily settled in other places 
in the county. In the autumn all hands were greatly 
afflicted with ague and fever, to which they had not been 
used, and by which they were greatly discouraged, so much 
so that they determined on leaving the county. They 
remained, however, through the succeeding winter, which 
was the winter of the very celebrated "deep snow" of 
Illinois. During that winter Abraham, together with his 
stepmother's son, John D. Johnston, and John Hanks, yet 
residing in Macon County, hired themselves to Denton 
OfFutt to take a flatboat from Beardstown, Illinois, to New 
Orleans ; and for that purpose were to join him — OfFutt — 
at Springfield, Illinois, so soon as the snow should go oflP. 
When it did go off, which was about the first of March, 1831, 
the county was so flooded as to make traveling by land 
impracticable ; to obviate which difficulty they purchased a 
large canoe, and came down the Sangamon River in it. This 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY 13 

is the time and manner of Abraham's first entrance into 
Sangamon County. They found OfFutt at Springfield, but 
learned from him that he had failed in getting a boat at 
Beardstown. This led to their hiring themselves to him for 
twelve dollars per month each, and getting the timber out 
of the trees and building a boat at Old Sangamon town on 
the Sangamon River, seven miles northwest of Springfield, 
which boat they took to New Orleans, substantially upon the 
old contract. 

During this boat-enterprise acquaintance with OfFutt, 
who was previously an entire stranger, he conceived a liking 
for Abraham, and believing he could turn him to account, 
he contracted with him to act as clerk for him, on his return 
from New Orleans, in charge of a store and mill at New 
Salem, then in Sangamon, now in Menard County. Hanks 
had not gone to New Orleans, but having a family, and 
being likely to be detained from home longer than at first 
expected, had turned back from St. Louis. He is the same 
John Hanks who now engineers the "rail enterprise" at 
Decatur,^ and is a first cousin to Abraham's mother. Abra- 
ham's father, with his own family and others mentioned, had, 
in pursuance of their intention, removed from Macon to 
Coles County. John D. Johnston, the stepmother's son, 
went to them, and Abraham stopped indefinitely and for 
the first time, as it were, by himself at New Salem, before 
mentioned. This was in July, 1831. Here he rapidly made 
acquaintances and friends. In less than a year OfFutt's 
business was failing — had almost failed — when the Black 
Hawk war of 1832 broke out. Abraham joined a volunteer 
company, and, to his own surprise, was elected captain of it. 

^ This refers to the incident in the IlHnois RepuWican convention in 
May, i860, when John Hanks brought into the hall some rails which Lincoln 
had split and proposed the " rail splitter " as the candidate of Illinois for 
President of the United States. The convention went wild with enthusiasm, 
endorsed Lincoln as its candidate, and thus gave the first great public 
impulse to his nomination which occurred a few weeks later. 



14 AUTOBIOGRAPHY 

He says he has not since had any success in Hfe which gave 
him so much satisfaction. He went to the campaign, served 
near three months, met the ordinary hardships of such an 
expedition, but was in no battle. He now owns, in Iowa, 
the land upon which his own warrants for the service were 
located. Returning from the campaign, and encouraged 
by his great popularity among his immediate neighbors, he 
the same year ran for the legislature, and was beaten — his 
own precinct, however, casting its votes 277 for and 7 against 
him — and that, too, while he was an avowed Clay man, and 
the precinct the autumn afterward giving a majority of 115 
to General Jackson over Mr. Clay. This was the only time 
Abraham was ever beaten on a direct vote of the people. 
He was now without means and out of business, but. was 
anxious to remain with his friends who had treated him with 
so much generosity, especially as he had nothing elsewhere 
to go to. He studied what he should do — thought of learn- 
ing the blacksmith trade — thought of trying to study law 
— rather thought he could not succeed at that without a 
better education. Before long, strangely enough, a man 
offered to sell, and did sell to Abraham and another as poor 
as himself, an old stock of goods, upon credit. They opened 
as merchants ; and he says that was the store. Of course they 
did nothing but get deeper and deeper in debt. He was 
appointed postmaster at New Salem — the office being too 
insignificant to make his politics an objection. The store 
winked out. The surveyor of Sangamon offered to depute 
to Abraham that portion of his work which was within his 
part of the county. He accepted, procured a compass and 
chain, studied Flint and Gibson a little, and went at it. 
This procured bread, and kept soul and body together. The 
election of 1834 came, and he was then elected to the legis- 
lature by the highest vote cast for any candidate. Major 
John T. Stuart, then in full practice of the law, was also 
elected. During the canvass, in a private conversation he 
encouraged Abraham [to] study law. After the election he 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY 1 5 

borrowed books of Stuart, took them home with him, and 
went at it in good earnest. He studied with nobody. He 
still mixed in the surveying to pay board and clothing bills. 
When the legislature met, the law books were dropped, but 
were taken up again at the end of the session. He was re- 
elected in 1836, 1838, and 1840. In the autumn of 1836 he 
obtained a law license, and on April 15, 1837, removed to 
Springfield, and commenced the practice — his old friend 
Stuart taking him into partnership. March 3, 1837, by a 
protest entered upon the "Illinois House Journal" of that 
date, at pages 817 and 818, Abraham, with Dan Stone, 
another representative of Sangamon, briefly defined his posi- 
tion on the slavery question ; and so far as it goes, it was then 
the same that it is now. The protest is as follows : 

"Resolutions upon the subject of domestic slavery having 
passed both branches of the General Assembly at its present ses- 
sion, the undersigned hereby protest against the passage of the 
same. 

" They believe that the institution of slavery is founded on both 
injustice and bad policy, but that the promulgation of Abolition 
doctrines tends rather to increase than abate its evils. 

" They believe that the Congress of the United States has no 
power under the Constitution to interfere with the institution 
of slavery in the different states. 

" They believe that the Congress of the United States has the 
power, under the Constitution, to abolish slavery in the District 
of Columbia, but that the power ought not to be exercised unless 
at the request of the people of the District. 

" The difference between these opinions and those contained in 
the above resolutions is their reason for entering this protest. 

" Dan Stone, 
"A. Lincoln, 
" Representatives from the County of Sangamon." 

In 1838 and 1840, Mr. Lincoln's party voted for him as 
Speaker, but being in the minority he was not elected. After 
1840 he declined a reelection to the legislature. He was on 



l6 AUTOBIOGRAPHY 

the Harrison electoral ticket in 1840, and on that of Clay 
in 1844, and spent much time and labor in both those can- 
vasses. In November, 1842, he was married to Mary, 
daughter of Robert S. Todd, of Lexington, Kentucky. 
They have three living children, all sons, one born in 1843, 
one in 1850, and one in 1853. They lost one, who was born 
in 1846. 

In 1846 he was elected to the lower House of Congress, 
and served one term only, commencing in December, 1847, 
and ending with the inauguration of General Taylor, in 
March, 1849. All the battles of the Mexican war had been 
fought before Mr. Lincoln took his seat in Congress, but the 
American army was still in Mexico, and the treaty of peace 
was not fully and formally ratified until the June afterward. 
Much has been said of his course in Congress in regard to this 
war. A careful examination of the "Journal" and ''Con- 
gressional Globe " shows that he voted for all the supply 
measures that came up, and for all the measures in any way 
favorable to the officers, soldiers, and their families, who 
conducted the war through : with the exception that some of 
these measures passed without yeas and nays, leaving no 
record as to how particular men voted. The "Journal" and 
"Globe" also show him voting that the war was unnecessarily 
and unconstitutionally begun by the President of the United 
States. This is the language of Mr. Ashmun's amendment, 
for which Mr. Lincoln and nearly or quite all other Whigs 
of the House of Representatives voted. 

Mr. Lincoln's reasons for the opinion expressed by this 
vote were briefly that the President had sent General Taylor 
into an inhabited part of the country belonging to Mexico, 
and not to the United States, and thereby had provoked the 
first act of hostility, in fact the commencement of the war; 
that the place, being the country bordering on the east bank 
of the Rio Grande, was inhabited by native Mexicans, born 
there under the Mexican government, and had never sub- 
mitted to, nor been conquered by, Texas or the United States, 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY 1 7 

nor transferred to either by treaty ; that although Texas 
claimed the Rio Grande as her boundary, Mexico had never 
recognized it, and neither Texas nor the United States had 
ever enforced it ; that there was a broad desert between that 
and the country over which Texas had actual control ; that 
the country where hostilities commenced, having once be- 
longed to Mexico, must remain so until it was somehow 
legally transferred, which had never been done. 

Mr. Lincoln thought the act of sending an armed force 
among the Mexicans was unnecessary, inasmuch as Mexico 
was in no way molesting or menacing the United States or 
the people thereof; and that it was unconstitutional, because 
the power of levying war is vested in Congress, and not in 
the President. He thought the principal motive for the act 
was to divert public attention from the surrender of ''Fifty- 
four, forty, or fight" to Great Britain, on the Oregon boun- 
dary question. 

Mr. Lincoln was not a candidate for reelection. This 
was determined upon and declared before he went to Wash- 
ington, in accordance with an understanding among Whig 
friends, by which Colonel Hardin and Colonel Baker had 
each previously served a single term in this same district. 

In 1848, during his term in Congress, he advocated General 
Taylor's nomination for the presidency, in opposition to all 
others, and also took an active part for his election after his 
nomination, speaking a few times in Maryland, near Washing- 
ton, several times in Massachusetts, and canvassing quite 
fully his own district in Illinois, which was followed by a 
majority in the district of over 1500 for General Taylor. 

Upon his return from Congress he went to the practice of 
the law with greater earnestness than ever before. In 1852 
he was upon the Scott electoral ticket, and did something in 
the way of canvassing, but owing to the hopelessness of the 
cause in Illinois he did less than in previous presidential 
canvasses. 

In 1854 his profession had almost superseded the thought 

LINCOLN — 2 



1 8 HANDBILL, 1832 

of politics in his mind, when the repeal of the Missouri Com- 
promise aroused him as he had never been before. 

In the autumn of that year he took the stump with no 
broader practical aim or object than to secure, if possible, 
the reelection of Hon. Richard Yates to Congress. His 
speeches at once attracted a more marked attention than they 
had ever before done. As the canvass proceeded he was 
drawn to different parts of the state outside of Mr. Yates's 
district. He did not abandon the law, but gave his atten- 
tion by turns to that and politics. The state agricultural 
fair was at Springfield that year, and Douglas was announced 
to speak there. 

In the canvass of 1856 Mr. Lincoln made over fifty 
speeches, no one of which, so far as he remembers, was put 
in print. One of them was made at Galena, but Mr. Lincoln 
has no recollection of it being printed ; nor does he remember 
whether in that speech he said anything about a Supreme 
Court decision. He may have spoken upon that subject, 
and some of the newspapers may have reported him as saying 
what is now ascribed to him ; but he thinks he could not have 
expressed himself as represented. 



FROM A HANDBILL ANNOUNCING HIS LEGISLATIVE 
CANDIDACY, 1832 

This is an interesting document, valuable because it is the first authentic 
example of Lincoln's literary style and the first expression of his political 
views. He had been living in Illinois two years, during which time he had 
spent a few months in helping his father's family erect a log house near 
Decatur, and in fencing the new place, had split some black walnut rails 
which were to make him famous thirty years later when the Republican 
state convention in Decatur should propose his name as the candidate of 
Illinois for President of the United States. From Decatur he had gone in 
July, 183 1, to New Salem, near Petersburg, now the county seat of Menard 
County. Here he was making a living as a laborer in a general store and 
on a flatboat. 

An Indian invasion of Illinois under Black Hawk in 1832 had made the 
organization of three regiments of militia necessary to repel the invaders. 



HANDBILL, 1832 1 9 

In this little army Lincoln's neighbors elected him to a captaincy, and he 
returned after a few weeks of a bloodless campaign, filled with the ambition 
to continue in some sort of public service. His platform, although limited 
to the subjects of usury and common schools, is sound enough, but it failed 
to elect him. The bitterness of defeat was sweetened by the knowledge that 
his own New Salem precinct gave him all but seven of the two hundred 
eighty-four votes which it cast. 

Fellow Citizens : Having become a candidate for the 
honorable office of one of your Representatives in the next 
General Assembly of this state, in accordance with an 
established custom and the principles of true republicanism/ 
it becomes my duty to make known to you, the people whom 
I propose to represent, my sentiments with regard to local 
affairs. . . . 

It appears that the practice of loaning money at exorbi- 
tant rates of interest has already been opened as a field for 
discussion ; so I suppose I may enter upon it without claim- 
ing the honor, or risking the danger, which may await its 
first explorer. It seems as though we are never to have an 
end to this baneful and corroding system, acting almost as 
prejudicially to the general interests of the community as a 
direct tax of several thousand dollars annually laid on each 
county for the benefit of a few individuals only, unless there 
be a law made fixing the limits of usury. A law for this 
purpose, I am of opinion, may be made without materially 
injuring any class of people. In cases of extreme necessity, 
there could always be means found to cheat the law; while 
in all other cases it would have its intended eff^ect. I would 
favor the passage of a law on this subject which might not 
be very easily evaded. Let it be such that the labor and 
difficulty of evading it could only be justified in cases of 
greatest necessity. 

Upon the subject of education, not presuming to dictate 

^ This, of course, does not refer to the Republican party, with whose 
organization, twenty-four years later, Lincoln was identified. Here it 
means representative government. 



20 HANDBILL, 1832 

any plan or system respecting it, I can only say that I view 
it as the most important subject which we, as a people, can 
be engaged in. That every man may receive at least a mod- 
erate education, and thereby be enabled to read the histories 
of his own and other countries, by which he may duly appre- 
ciate the value ofour free institutions, appears to be an object 
of vital importance, even on this account alone, to say noth- 
ing of the advantages and satisfaction to be derived from all 
being able to read the Scriptures, and other works both of a 
religious and moral nature, for themselves. 

For my part, I desire to see the time when education 
— and by its means, morality, sobriety, enterprise, and 
industry — shall become much more general than at present, 
and should be gratified to have it in my power to contribute 
something to the advancement of any measure which might 
have a tendency to accelerate that happy period. 

With regard to existing laws, some alterations are thought 
to be necessary. Many respectable men have suggested that 
our estray laws, the law respecting the issuing of executions, 
the road law, and some others, are deficient in their present 
form, and require alterations. But considering the great 
probability that the framers of those laws were wiser than 
myself, I should prefer not meddling with them, unless they 
were first attacked by others ; in which case I should feel 
it both a privilege and a duty to take that stand which, in 
my view, might tend most to the advancement of justice. 

But, fellow citizens, I shall conclude. Considering the 
great degree of modesty which should always attend youth, 
it is probable I have already been more presuming than 
becomes me. However, upon the subjects of which I have 
treated, I have spoken as I have thought. I may be wrong 
in regard to any or all of them; but, holding it a. sound 
maxim that it is better only sometimes to be right than at all 
times to be wrong, so soon as I discover my opinions to 
be erroneous I shall be ready to renounce them. 

Every man is said to have his peculiar ambition. Whether 



LETTER TO GEORGE SPEARS [1833?] 21 

it be true or not, I can say, for one, that I have no other 
so great as that of being truly esteemed of my fellow men by 
rendering myself worthy of their esteem. How far I shall 
succeed in gratifying this ambition is yet to be developed. 
I am young and unknown to many of you. I was born and 
have ever remained in the most humble walks of life. I have 
no wealthy or popular relations or friends to recommend me. 
My case is thrown exclusively upon the independent voters 
of the country, and if elected, they will have conferred a favor 
upon me for which I shall be unremitting in my labors to 
compensate. But if the good people in their wisdom shall 
see fit to keep me in the background, I have been too familiar 
with disappointments to be very much chagrined. 

Your friend and fellow citizen, 

A. Lincoln. 
New Salem, March 9, 1832. 



LETTER TO GEORGE SPEARS 

In 1833 Lincoln, although a Henry Clay Whig, held two Democratic 
appointments, postmaster of New Salem and deputy surveyor of Sanga- 
mon County. As postmaster of the little village that was soon to disappear, 
he found time to become familiar with English grammar and the writings 
of Shakespeare and Burns and Blackstone. As deputy surveyor he earned 
an occasional fee of three dollars for a day's work. This letter to George 
Spears, written in 1833 or 1834, shows that he had not been long in politics 
or his feelings would not have been hurt over so little a matter. 

Mr. Spears : At your request I send you a receipt for 
the postage on your paper. I am somewhat surprised at 
your request. I will, however, comply with it. The law 
requires newspaper postage to be paid in advance, and now 
that I have waited a full year you choose to wound my feel- 
ings by insinuating that unless you get a receipt I will 
probably make you pay it again. 

Respectfully, 

A. Lincoln. 



22 POLITICAL ANNOUNCEMENT, 1836 

Received of George Spears in full for postage on the 
"Sangamon Journal" up to the first of July, 1834. 

A. Lincoln, P. M. 



ANNOUNCEMENT OF HIS PLATFORM AS A CANDIDATE FOR 
THE LEGISLATURE, 1836 

When Lincoln made his race for the legislature, in 1836, he had already- 
served one term. His platform, here printed, favors suffrage for women 
as well as men, the distribution of government lands among the states, 
and the devotion of public funds to internal improvements. The feature 
characteristic of Lincoln, but not always found among legislators, is the 
declaration that the whole people, regardless of party, shall be his constitu- 
ency. Hugh L. White, senator from Tennessee, was the Whig candidate 
for President of the United States and was defeated by Martin Van Buren. 
Lincoln's candidacy, here announced, was successful. In the legislature, 
in speeches which are published in the Nicolay and Hay collection of his 
writings and speeches, he advocated the liberal spending of public money 
in aid of railways, canals, and highways. 

New Salem, June 13, 1836. 

To THE Editor of the Journal : In your paper of last 
Saturday I see a communication, over the signature of " Many 
Voters," in which the candidates . . . announced . . . are 
called upon to " show their hands." Agreed. Here's mine. 

I go for all sharing the privileges of the government who 
assist in bearing its burdens. Consequently, I go for ad- 
mitting all whites to the right of suffrage who pay taxes or 
bear arms (by no means excluding females). 

If elected, I shall consider the whole people of Sangamon 
my constituents, as well those that oppose as those that 
support me. 

While acting as their representative, I shall be governed 
by their will on all subjects upon which I have the means of 
knowing what their will is ; and upon all others, I shall do 
what my own judgment teaches me will best advance their 
interests. Whether elected or not, I go for distributing the 



LETTER TO IF. G. ANDERSON, 1840 23 

proceeds of the sales of the pubHc lands to the several states, 
to enable our state, in common with others, to dig canals and 
construct railroads without borrowing money and paying 
the interest on it. 

If alive on the first Monday in November, I shall vote for 
Hugh L. White for President. 

Very respectfully, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO W. G. ANDERSON 

Patient, good-humored, gentle, yet firm in his conviction that he has 
been in the right, he is evidently willing to bear much rather than quarrel, 
and to make concessions in aid of peace, so long as they do not yield the truth 
or lower his dignity. The temperamental characteristics thus early mani- 
fested remained to the last. 

The disagreement referred to was doubtless political, as both men were 
active in poHtics. Mr. Anderson had represented Lawrence County in the 
Illinois legislature in the session of 1832 and served later in the sessions 
of 1842 and 1844. 

Lawrenceville, Illinois, October 31, 1840. 

Dear Sir : Your note of yesterday is received. In the 
difficulty between us of which you speak, you say you think 
I was the aggressor. I do not think I was. You say my 
"words imported insult." I meant them as a fair set-oflP 
to your own statements, and not otherwise ; and in that 
light alone I now wish you to understand them. You ask 
for my present ''feelings on the subject." I entertain no 
unkind feelings to you, and none of any sort upon the sub- 
ject, except a sincere regret that I permitted myself to get 
into such an altercation. 

Yours, etc., 

A. Lincoln. 



24 LETTER TO J. T. STUART, 1841 



LETTER TO JOHN T. STUART 

Major John T. Stuart, to whom this letter is written, was Lincoln's law 
partner (1837 to 1841), his fellow worker in Whig politics, and always his 
loyal friend. At this time he was representative in Congress from the 
Springfield district, the same district which Lincoln himself was to represent 
six years later. The letter was written during one of those periods of mental 
depression from which Lincoln suffered at times, and from which he never 
wholly escaped. His engagement to marry Mary Todd had just been 
broken. His legislative duties and opportunities interested him little. The 
melancholy into which he had fallen caused his friends much anxiety. After 
many months it was dispelled by a visit with his most intimate friend, 
Joshua Fry Speed, at Louisville. A number of letters given in this volume 
reveal the wholesome effect his friendly relations with the Speed family 
had upon him. 

Springfield, Illinois, January 23, 1841. 

Dear Stuart: Yours of the 3d instant is received, and I 
proceed to answer it as well as I can, though from the de- 
plorable state of my mind at this time, I fear I shall give you 
but little satisfaction. . . . 

For not giving you a general summary of news, you must 
pardon me ; it is not in my power to do so. I am now the 
most miserable man living. If what I feel were equally 
distributed to the whole human family, there would not 
be one cheerful face on the earth. Whether I shall ever be 
better, I cannot tell ; I awfully forebode I shall not. To 
remain as I am is impossible; I must die or be better, it 
appears to me. The matter you speak of on my account 
you may attend to as you say, unless you shall hear of my 
condition forbidding it. I say this because I fear I shall be 
unable to attend to any business here, and a change of scene 
might help me. If I could be myself, I would rather remain 
at home with Judge Logan. I can write no more. 

Your friend, as ever, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO MISS MARY SPEED, 184.1 25 



LETTER TO MISS MARY SPEED 

Miss Mary Speed, of Louisville, was the sister of Joshua Fry Speed. 
This is the first expression we have of Lincoln's sympathy for the negro 
and his understanding of the negro temperament. The letter throws some 
light on Lincoln's sentimental nature, his interest in girls of all ages, and 
his eagerness to keep up a correspondence that would beguile the loneliness 
of his life as a lawyer who had to travel the circuit. Bloomington, where 
the letter was written, and Charleston, where the response to it was hoped 
for, were many miles apart, and, in those days of horseback travel, both 
were far from Springfield, where his broken engagement made him far from 
happy. 

Bloomington, III., September 27, 1841. 
Miss Mary Speed, Louisville, Ky. 

My Friend : Having resolved to write to some of your 
mother's family, and not having the express permission of 
any one of them to do so, I have had some little difficulty in 
determining on which to inflict the task of reading what I 
now feel must be a most dull and silly letter; but when I 
remembered that you and I were something of cronies while 
I was at Farmington, and that while there I was under the 
necessity of shutting you up in a room to prevent your 
committing an assault and battery upon me, I instantly 
decided that you should be the devoted one. I assume that 
you have not heard from Joshua and myself since we left, 
because I think it doubtful whether he has written. 

You remember there was some uneasiness about Joshua's 
health when we left. That little indisposition of his turned 
out to be nothing serious, and it was pretty nearly forgotten 
when we reached Springfield. 

We got on board the steamboat Lebanon in the locks of 
the canal, about twelve o'clock M. of the day we left, and 
reached St. Louis the next Monday at 8 p.m. Nothing of 
interest happened during the passage, except the vexatious 
delays occasioned by the sand bars be thought interesting. 



26 LETTER TO MISS MARY SPEED, 1841 

By the way, a fine example was presented on board the boat 
for contemplating the effect of condition upon human happi- 
ness. A gentleman had purchased twelve negroes in different 
parts of Kentucky, and was taking them to a farm in the 
South. They were chained six and six together. A small 
iron clevis was around the left wrist of each, and this was 
fastened to the main chain by a shorter one, at a convenient 
distance from the others, so that the negroes were strung 
together precisely like so many fish upon a trotline. In this 
condition they were being separated forever from the scenes 
of their childhood, their friends, their fathers and mothers, 
and brothers and sisters, and many of them from their 
wives and children, and going into perpetual slavery, where 
the lash of the master is proverbially more ruthless and 
unrelenting than any other where ; and yet amid all these 
distressing circumstances, as we would think them, they were 
the most cheerful and apparently happy creatures on board. 
One whose offense for which he had been sold was an over- 
fondness for his wife, played the fiddle almost continually, 
and the others danced, sang, cracked jokes, and played 
various games with cards from day to day. How true it is 
that "God tempers the wind to the shorn lamb," or in other 
words, that he renders the worst of human conditions 
tolerable, while he permits the best to be nothing better than 
tolerable. To return to the narrative. When we reached 
Springfield, I stayed but one day, when I started on this 
tedious circuit where I now am. 

Do you remember my going to the city, while I was in Ken- 
tucky, to have a tooth extracted, and making a failure of it } 
Well, that same old tooth got to paining me so much that 
about a week since I had it torn out, bringing with it a bit 
of the jawbone, the consequence of which is that my mouth 
is now so sore that I can neither talk nor eat. 

I am literally "subsisting on savory remembrances'* — 
that is, being unable to eat, I am living upon the remem- 
brance of the delicious dishes of peaches and cream we used 



LETTER TO GEO. E. PICKETT, 1842 27 

to have at your house. When we left, Miss Fanny Henning 
was owing you a visit, as I understood. Has she paid it yet .? 
If she has, are you not convinced that she is one of the 
sweetest girls in the world ? There is but one thing about 
her, so far as I could perceive, that I would have otherwise 
than it is — that is, something of a tendency to melancholy. 
This, let it be observed, is a misfortune, not a fault. 

Give her an assurance of my very highest regard when you 
see her. Is little Siss Eliza Davis at your house yet ? If 
she is, kiss her "o'er and o'er again" for me. 

Tell your mother that I have not got her "present" [an 
"Oxford" Bible] with me, but I intend to read it regularly 
when I return home. I doubt not that it is really, as she 
says, the best cure for the blues, could one but take it accord- 
ing to the truth. Give my respects to all your sisters (includ- 
ing Aunt Emma) and brothers. Tell Mrs. Peay, of whose 
happy face I shall long retain a pleasant remembrance, that 
I have been trying to think of a name for her homestead, but 
as yet cannot satisfy myself with one. I shall be v^ry happy 
to receive a line from you soon after you receive this, and in 
case you choose to favor me with one, address it to Charleston, 
Coles County, 111., as I shall be there about the time to 
receive it. 

Your sincere friend, 

A. Lincoln. 



EXTRACTS FROM A LETTER TO GEORGE E. PICKETT 

George Edward Pickett, then seventeen years old, was about to enter 
the United States Military Academy at West Point, by an appointment 
from Illinois, secured for him by Mr. Lincoln. He graduated in 1846 and 
won distinction in the war with Mexico. Later, as a major general in the 
army of the Confederacy, his achievements — especially at Gettysburg and 
Petersburg — gained him a name for brilliant and fearless leadership unsur- 
passed in that great struggle. It is possible that George Pickett, who was 
to become a colonel of Virginia troops in 1861, was not ready to assent 



28 LETTER TO GEO. E. PICKETT, 1842 

to the thought which Lincoln here expressed, "that the one victory we can 
ever call complete will be that one which proclaims that there is not one 
slave ... on the face of God's green earth." 

February 22, 1842. 

I never encourage deceit, and falsehood, especially if you 
have got a bad memory, is the worst enemy a fellow can 
have. The fact is truth is your truest friend, no matter 
what the circumstances are. Notwithstanding this copy- 
book preamble, my boy, I am inclined to suggest a little 
prudence on your part. You see I have a congenital aversion 
to failure, and the sudden announcement to your Uncle 
Andrew of the success of your '*lamp-rubbing" might 
possibly prevent your passing the severe physical examina- 
tion to which you will be subjected in order to enter the 
Military Academy. You see, I should like to have a perfect 
soldier credited to dear old Illinois — no broken bones, 
scalp wounds, etc. So I think perhaps it might be wise to 
hand this letter from me, in to your good uncle through his 
room-window after he has had a comfortable dinner, and 
watch its effect from the top of the pigeon house. 

I have just told the folks here in Springfield on this iioth 
anniversary of the birth of him whose name, mightiest in the 
cause of civil liberty, still mightiest in the cause of moral 
reformation, we mention in solemn awe, in naked, deathless 
splendor, that the one victory we can ever call complete 
will be that one which proclaims that there is not one slave 
or one drunkard on the face of God's green earth. Recruit 
for this victory. 

Now, boy, on your march, don't you go and forget the old 
maxim that " one drop of honey catches more flies than a 
half gallon of gall." Load your musket with this maxim, 
and smoke it in your pipe. 



TEMPERANCE ADDRESS, 1842 29 



FROM AN ADDRESS BEFORE THE SPRINGFIELD WASHING- 
TONIAN TEMPERANCE SOCIETY, FEBRUARY 22, 1842 

At a time and in a pioneer country where no especial odium attached 
to the use of intoxicants, Lincoln was a total abstainer and always re- 
mained so. The literary style of this early effort is florid and opaque. It 
betrays its author's personality only where it shows Lincoln's sympathy for 
the unfortunate, and, in one place, his irrepressible humor. 

Although the temperance cause has been in progress for 
near twenty years, it is apparent to all that it is just now 
being crowned with a degree of success hitherto unparalleled. 

The list of its friends is daily swelled by the additions of 
fifties, of hundreds, and of thousands. The cause itself 
seems suddenly transformed from a cold abstract theory to a 
living, breathing, active, and powerful chieftain, going forth 
conquering and to conquer. The citadels of his great adver- 
sary are daily being stormed and dismantled; his temple 
and his altars, where the rites of his idolatrous worship have 
long been performed, and where human sacrifices have long 
been wont to be made, are daily desecrated and deserted. 
The triumph of the conqueror's fame is sounding from hill to 
hill, from sea to sea, and from land to land, and calling 
millions to his standard at a blast. 

Another error, as it seems to me, into Vvhich the old re- 
formers fell, was the position that all habitual drunkards 
were utterly incorrigible, and therefore must be turned adrift 
and damned without remedy in order that the grace of tem- 
perance might abound, to the temperate then, and to all 
mankind some hundreds of years thereafter. There is in 
this something so repugnant to humanity, so uncharitable, 
so cold-blooded and feelingless, that it never did, nor ever 
can enlist the enthusiasm of a popular cause. We could 
not love the man who taught it — we could not hear him 
with patience. The heart could not throw open its portals 



30 TEMPERANCE ADDRESS, 1842 

to it, the generous man could not adopt it — it could not 
mix with his blood. It looked so fiendishly selfish, so like 
throwing fathers and brothers overboard to lighten the boat 
for our security, that the noble-minded shrank from the 
manifest meanness of the thing. And besides this, the 
benefits of a reformation to be eflPected by such a system were 
too remote in point of time to warmly engage many in its 
behalf. Few can be induced to labor exclusively for pos- 
terity; and none will do it enthusiastically. Posterity has 
done nothing for us ; and theorize on it as we may, practically 
we shall do very little for it, unless we are made to think we 
are at the same time doing something for ourselves. 

What an ignorance of human nature does it exhibit, to 
ask or expect a whole community to rise up and labor for 
the temporal happiness of others, after themselves shall be 
consigned to the dust, a majority of which community take 
no pains whatever to secure their own eternal welfare at no 
more distant day ! Great distance in either time or space 
has wonderful power to lull and render quiescent the human 
mind. Pleasures to be enjoyed, or pains to be endured, after 
we shall be dead and gone, are but little regarded even in 
our own cases, and much less in the cases of others. Still, 
in addition to this there is something so ludicrous in promises 
of good or threats of evil a great way off as to render the whole 
subject with which they are connected easily turned into 
ridicule. *' Better lay down that spade you are stealing, 
Paddy; if you don't you'll pay for it at the day of judg- 
ment." "Be the powers, if ye'll credit me so long I'll take 
another jist." 



"But," say some, "we are no drunkards, and we shall 
not acknowledge ourselves such by joining a reformed 
drunkard's society, whatever our influence might be." 
Surely no Christian will adhere to this objection. 

If they believe, as they profess, that Omnipotence con- 



LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1842 3 1 

descended to take on himself the form of sinful man, and, 
as such, to die an ignominious death for their sakes, surely 
they will not refuse submission to the infinitely lesser con- 
descension for the temporal and perhaps eternal salvation 
of a large, erring, and unfortunate class of their fellow 
creatures. Nor is the condescension very great. In my 
judgment, such of us as have never fallen victims have been 
spared more by the absence of appetite, than from any 
mental or moral superiority over those who have. Indeed I 
beheve, if we take habitual drunkards as a class, their heads 
and their hearts will bear an advantageous comparison with 
those of any other class. There seems ever to have been a 
proneness in the brilliant and warm-blooded to fall into this 
vice. The demon of intemperance ever seems to have 
delighted in sucking the blood of genius and of generosity. 
What one of us but can call to mind some relative more 
promising in youth than all his fellows, who has fallen a 
sacrifice to his rapacity ? He ever seems to have gone forth, 
like the Egyptian angel of death, commissioned to slay, if 
not the first, the fairest born of every family. Shall he now 
be arrested in his desolating career ? In that arrest all can 
give aid that will ; and who shall be excused that can and 
will not ? Far around as human breath has ever blown, he 
keeps our fathers, our brothers, our sons, and our friends 
prostrate in the chains of moral death. . . . 



LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 

The letters to Joshua Fry Speed given here are almost the only published 
letters of Lincoln which are intimately personal in their character. Speed 
was the proprietor of a general store in Springfield in 1837 when Lincoln 
moved there from New Salem for the purpose of engaging in the practice 
of law. With no property except a book or two in his saddlebags and no 
money to pay for furnishing a room, he accepted Speed's invitation to 
occupy a bed over the store. This upstairs bedroom was his home until 
Speed moved back to Kentucky in 1841. The big fireplace in Speed's 
store was the gathering place for a group, all of whom were, or soon became, 



32 LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1842 

men of mark in the public life of Illinois. Speed and Lincoln continued 
their intimacy until the end. Joshua F. Speed's lecture of Lincoln remin- 
iscence, published, but out of print, is one of the most valuable contribu- 
tions to Lincolniana. James Speed, Joshua Speed's brother, became At- 
torney General in Lincoln's cabinet in the later years of the Civil War. 

The confession — "I am so poor and make so little headway in the world, 
that I drop back in a month of idleness as much as I gain in a year's sow- 
ing" — shows how precarious a living the law afforded in pioneer days to 
even as good a lawyer as Abraham Lincoln. 

Springfield, February 25, 1842. 

Dear Speed: Yours of the i6th instant, announcing 
that Miss Fanny and you are "no more twain, but one 
flesh," reached me this morning. I have no way of telHng 
you how much happiness I wish you both, though I beheve 
you both can conceive it. I feel somewhat jealous of both 
of you now: you will be so exclusively concerned for one 
another, that I shall be forgotten entirely. . . . 

I regret to learn that you have resolved to not return 
to Illinois. I shall be very lonesome without you. How 
miserably things seem to be arranged in this world ! If we 
have no friends, we have no pleasure; and if we have them, 
we are sure to lose them, and be doubly pained by the loss. 
I did hope she and you would make your home here; but 
I own I have no right to insist. You owe obligations to her 
ten thousand times more sacred than you can owe to others, 
and in that light let them be respected and observed. It 
is natural that she should desire to remain with her relatives 
and friends. As to friends, however, she could not need 
them anywhere : she would have them in abundance here. . . . 

Yours forever, 

Lincoln. 

Springfield, Illinois, July 4, 1842. 

Dear Speed : . . . 

As to my having been displeased with your advice, surely 
you know better than that. I know you do, and therefore 



LETTERS TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1842 33 

will not labor to convince you. True, that subject is painful 
to me; but it is not your silence, or the silence of all the 
world, that can make me forget it. I acknowledge the 
correctness of your advice too ; but before I resolve to do the 
one thing or the other, I must gain my confidence in my ovv^n 
ability to keep my resolves when they are made. In that 
ability you know I once prided myself as the only or chief 
gem of my character; that gem I lost — how and where 
you know too well. I have not yet regained it; and until 
I do, I cannot trust myself in any matter of much importance. 
I believe now that had you understood my case at the time 
as well as I understood yours afterward, by the aid you 
would have given me I should have sailed through clear, 
but that does not now afford me sufficient confidence to begin 
that or the like of that again. 

You make a kind acknowledgment of your obligations 
to me for your present happiness. I am pleased with that 
acknowledgment. But a thousand times more am I pleased 
to know that you enjoy a degree of happiness worthy of an 
acknowledgment. The truth is, I am not sure that there 
was any merit with me in the part I took in your difficulty; 
I was drawn to it by a fate. If I would I could not have done 
less than I did. I was always superstitious ; I believe God 
made me one of the instruments of bringing your Fanny and 
you together, which union I have no doubt he had fore- 
ordained. Whatever he designs he will do for me yet. 
"Stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord'* is my text 
just now. If, as you say, you have told Fanny all, I should 
have no objection to her seeing this letter, but for its refer- 
ence to our friend here : let her seeing it depend upon 
whether she has ever known anything of my affairs; and if 
she has not, do not let her. 

I do not think I can come to Kentucky this season. I am 
so poor and make so little headway in the world, that I 
drop back in a month of idleness as much as I gain in a 
year's sowing. I should like to visit you again. I should 

LINCOLN — 3 



34 LETTER TO MARTIN S. MORRIS, 1843 

like to see that "sis" of yours that was absent when I was 
there, though I suppose she would run away again if she were 
to hear I was coming. 

My respects and esteem to all 3^our friends there, and, by 
your permission, my love to your Fanny. 

Ever yours, 
A. Lincoln. 



FROM A LETTER TO MARTIN S. MORRIS 

This letter refers to Lincoln's candidacy for the Whig nomination for 
Congress. One of his opponents in the race was Edward D. Baker, a Spring- 
field lawyer and a brilliant orator. Afterwards United States senator from 
Oregon and colonel of volunteers in the army of the Union, Baker was killed 
at the battle of Ball's Bluff, in 1861. Menard County, where Morris lived, 
was Lincoln's first home in Illinois, and the county seat of Sangamon 
County was Springfield. The statement of the writer, "I do, however, 
feel myself bound not to hinder Baker in any way — I should despise my- 
self were I to attempt it," shows Lincoln's characteristic fairness in a po- 
litical fight. Lincoln and Baker were intimate friends, and Lincoln's first 
child was named Edward Baker Lincoln. The third candidate against 
Lincoln and Baker was John J. Hardin, and he was successful. In the next 
election, 1845, Baker was chosen, and he, in turn, was succeeded in 1847 
by Abraham Lincoln. 

Martin S. Morris was a blacksmith and wagon maker and then an active 
political worker in the Whig party. Later he became a Republican, and as 
a Republican continued one of Lincoln's faithful supporters in politics. 
Menard County, although partial to Lincoln's candidacy, was a Democratic 
stronghold. 

Springfield, Illinois, March 26, 1843. 

Friend Morris : . . . It is truly gratifying to me to learn 
that while the people of Sangamon have cast me off, my old 
friends of Menard, who have known me longest and best, 
stick to me. It would astonish, if not amuse, the older 
citizens to learn that I (a stranger, friendless, uneducated, 
penniless boy, working on a flatboat at ten dollars per 
month) have been put down here as the candidate of pride, 
wealth, and aristocratic family distinction. Yet so, chiefly. 



LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY, 1845 35 

it was. There was, too, the strangest combination of church 
influence against me. Baker is a CampbelHte ; and there- 
fore, as I suppose, with few exceptions, got all that church. 
My wife has some relations in the Presbyterian churches, 
and some with the Episcopal churches ; and therefore, 
wherever it would tell, I was set down as either the one or 
the other, while it was everywhere contended that no Chris- 
tian ought to go for me, because I belonged to no church, 
was suspected of being a deist, and had talked about fighting 
a duel. With all these things. Baker, of course, had nothing 
to do. Nor do I complain of them. As to his own church 
going for him, I think that was right enough, and as to the 
influences I have spoken of in the other, though they were 
very strong, it would be grossly untrue and unjust to charge 
that they acted upon them in a body, or were very near so. 
I only mean that those influences levied a tax of a consider- 
able per cent upon my strength throughout the religious 

controversy. But enough of this 

You say you shall instruct your delegates for me unless I 
object. I certainly shall not object. That would be too 
pleasant a compliment for me to tread in the dust. And, 
besides, if anything should happen ... by which Baker 
should be thrown out of the fight, I would be at liberty to 
accept the nomination if I could get it. I do, however, 
feel myself bound not to hinder him in any way from getting 
the nomination. I should despise myself were I to attempt it. 

Yours as ever, 

A. Lincoln. 
P. S. Will you write me again ? 



LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY 

It is plain that as far back as 1845, Lincoln, while considering slavery 
as an evil, believed he had no right to interfere with it where it existed 
lawfully within a state, but that it was his duty to work to prevent the 



36 LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY, 1845 

extension of slavery into new territory. This position, assumed by the 
Republican party in i860, was not extreme enough to satisfy many of the 
Abolitionists, and yet it lost the Republicans all hope of support in any 
of the slave states. Lincoln's personal feeling was strongly antislavery, 
but his political conviction, based upon a respect for the constitutional 
rights of the slaveholder, kept him from advocating anything more ex- 
treme than an opposition to the extension of slavery into the territories 
and the free states. 

Williamson Durley and his brother Madison, of Putnam County, Illinois, 
were local members of the Liberty party, a "third party" movement carried 
on by the more extreme of the antislavery partisans. The independent 
movement from which Lincoln was here trying to dissuade the brothers 
failed for the very reasons so well advanced by Lincoln in this letter. Mr. 
Durley had served with Lincoln in the Black Hawk war, since which time 
he had been a farmer and had conducted a general store in a small way in 
Hennepin. He had been a county commissioner, and later, by appointment 
of President Lincoln, he held a position in the federal revenue department. 

Springfield, October 3, 1845. 

When I saw you at home, it was agreed that I should 
write to you and your brother Madison. Until I then saw 
you I was not aware of your being what is generally called 
an Abolitionist, or, as you call yourself, a Liberty man, 
though I well knew there were many such in your country. 

I was glad to hear that you intended to attempt to bring 
about, at the next election in Putnam, a union of the Whigs 
proper and such of the Liberty men as are Whigs in principle 
on all questions save only that of slavery. So far as I can 
perceive, by such union neither party need yield anything 
on the point in difference between them. If the Whig 
Abolitionists of New York had voted with us last fall, Mr. 
Clay would now be President, Whig principles in the ascend- 
ant, and Texas not annexed ; whereas, by the division, all 
that either had at stake in the contest was lost. And, 
indeed, it was extremely probable, beforehand, that such 
would be the result. As I always understood, the Liberty 
men deprecated the annexation of Texas extremely; and this 
being so, why they should refuse to cast their votes [so] 
as to prevent it, even to me seemed wonderful. What was 



LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY, 1845 37 

their process of reasoning, I can only judge from what a 
single one of them told me. It was this : "We are not to do 
evil that good maiy come/' This general proposition is 
doubtless correct ; but did it apply ? If by your votes you 
could have prevented the extension, etc., of slavery would 
it not have been good, and not evil, so to have used your 
votes, even though it involved the casting of them for a 
slaveholder .? By the fruit the tree is to be known. An 
evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit. If the fruit of elect- 
ing Mr. Clay would have been to prevent the extension of 
slavery, could the act of electing have been evil .? 

But I will not argue further. I perhaps ought to say that 
individually I never was much interested in the Texas ques- 
tion. I never could see much good to come of annexation, 
inasmuch as they were already a free republican people on 
our own model. On the other hand, I never could very 
clearly see how the annexation would augment the evil of 
slavery. It always seemed to me that slaves would be taken 
there in about equal numbers, with or without annexation. 
And if more were taken because of annexation, still there 
would be just so many the fewer left where they were taken 
from. It is possibly true, to some extent, that, with annexa- 
tion, some slaves may be sent to Texas and continued in 
slavery that otherwise might have been liberated. To 
whatever extent this may be true, I think annexation an 
evil. I hold it to be a paramount duty of us in the free 
states, due to the union of the states, and perhaps to liberty 
itself (paradox though it may seem), to let the slavery of the 
other states alone ; while, on the other hand, I hold it to 
be equally clear that we should never knowingly lend 
ourselves, directly or indirectly, to prevent that slavery 
from dying a natural death — to find new places for it to 
live in, when it can no longer exist in the old. Of course I 
am not now considering what would be our duty in cases of 
insurrection among the slaves. To recur to the Texas 
question, I understand the Liberty men to have viewed 



38 FERSES, 1846 

annexation as a much greater evil than ever I did ; and I 
would like to convince you, if I could, that they could have 
prevented it, if they had chosen. 

I intend this letter for you and Madison together; and if 
you and he or either shall think fit to drop me a line, I shall 
be pleased. 

Yours with respect, 

A. Lincoln. 



VERSES, April, 1846 

These verses are as good as the reader would expect from the sentimental 
young man whose favorite poem is said to have been "O, why should the 
Spirit of Mortal be proud ?" Their old-fashioned stanza form belongs to 
the verse of the i8th century. They are valuable here because of the 
glimpse they give into Lincoln's inner life. The knowledge that at this 
time Lincoln was a close student of Burns and Shakespeare makes it hard 
to realize that he thought enough of these lines to send them to a corre- 
spondent with the promise of more. They record the impressions gained 
from a visit to the country about Gentryville, in Spencer County, Indiana, 
where the author had spent his boyhood, and whither, in the campaign of 
1844, he went to make speeches in behalf of Henry Clay, the Whig candidate 
for the presidency. 

Memory 

My childhood's home I see again, 

And sadden with the view; 
And still, as memory crowds my brain, 

There's pleasure in it too. 

O Memory ! thou midway world 

'Twixt earth and paradise. 
Where things decayed and loved ones lost 

In dreamy shadows rise. 

And, freed from all that's earthly vile. 
Seem hallowed, pure, and bright, 



FERSES, 1846 39 

Like scenes in some enchanted isle 
All bathed in liquid light. 

As dusky mountains please the eye 

When twilight chases day; 
As bugle-notes that, passing by, 

In distance die away; 

As leaving some grand waterfall. 

We, lingering, list its roar — 
So memory will hallow all 

We've known, but know no more. 

Near twenty years have passed away 

Since here I bid farewell 
To woods and fields, and scenes of play. 

And playmates loved so well. 

Where many were, but few remain 

Of old familiar things ; 
But seeing them, to mind again 

The lost and absent brings. 

The friends I left that parting day. 

How changed, as time has sped ! 
Young childhood grown, strong manhood gray, 

And half of all are dead. 

I hear the loved survivors tell 

How naught from death could save, 
Till every sound appears a knell, 

And every spot a grave. 

I range the fields with pensive tread. 

And pace the hollow rooms. 
And feel (companion of the dead) 

I'm living in the tombs. 



40 LETTER TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 



FROM A LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 

William H. Herndon was Lincoln's partner in the practice of law at 
Springfield from 1843 until 1861. He was nine years younger than Lin- 
coln, a man of considerable learning, a fair lawyer, and until Lincoln's 
death a loyal friend. He gathered the first material for his distinguished 
partner's biography and placed it at the disposal of Ward H. Lamon. Later 
with the aid of Jesse W. Weik, of Greencastle, Indiana, he published a three- 
volume life of Lincoln which contains much valuable biographical material. 
The speeches in Congress to which this letter refers gave Lincoln his first 
reputation as a political debater, and resulted in an invitation to campaign 
New England for General Zachary Taylor, the Whig candidate for President 
in 1848; but his opposition in Congress to the prosecution of the war with 
Mexico, at a time when the military success and the promise of enlarging 
American territory by the annexation of Texas were everywhere popular, 
would have made his reelection to Congress impossible had he become a 
candidate. 

The letter shows his fine sense of honor, a feeling which controlled his 
political conduct as it did his career at the law. 

Washington, January 8, 1848. 

Dear William : Your letter of December 27th was 
received a day or two ago. I am much obliged to you for 
the trouble you have taken and promise to take, in my 
little business there. As to speech-making, by way of 
getting the hang of the House, I made a little speech two 
or three days ago on a post-office question of no general inter- 
est. I find speaking here and elsewhere about the same thing. 
I was about as badly scared and no worse, as I am when I 
speak in court. I expect to make one within a week or two, 
in which I hope to succeed well enough to wish you to see it. 

It is very pleasant to learn from you that there are some 
who desire that I should be reelected. I most heartily 
thank them for their partiality; and I can say, as Mr. Clay 
said of the annexation of Texas, that "personally I would 
not object" to a reelection, although I thought at the time, 
and still think, it would be quite as well for me to return to 



LETTER TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 4 1 

the law at the end of a single term. I made the declaration 
that I would not be a candidate again, more from a wish to 
deal fairly with others, to keep peace among our friends, and 
to keep the district from going to the enemy, than for any 
cause personal to myself; so that, if it should so happen 
that nobody else wishes to be elected, I could not refuse the 
people the right of sending me again. But to enter myself 
as a competitor of others, or to authorize any one so to enter 
me, is what my word and honor forbid. 

Most truly your friend, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 

The interest of this letter hes in the relations which afterwards existed 
between Alexander H. Stephens, then 36 years old, and Abraham Lincoln, 
then 39, and both prominent Whig politicians. In the anxious weeks 
which followed the national election of i860, Lincoln used every effort to 
retain his hold upon Stephens, whose friendship he greatly valued. He 
would have liked to offer Stephens a cabinet appointment, but Georgia's 
adoption of the ordinance of secession in 1861 practically carried Stephens 
and his followers out of the Union. Alexander H. Stephens became Vice 
President of the Confederate States of America, and, at the close of the war, 
was one of the three commissioners of the dying Confederacy who met 
President Lincoln at Hampton Roads, in 1865, to take part in an unsuccess- 
ful effort to end the war and agree upon terms of peace. 

Washington, February 2, 1848. 

Dear William: I just take my pen to say that Mr. 
Stephens, of Georgia, a little, slim, pale-faced, consumptive 
man, with a voice like Logan's, has just concluded the very 
best speech of an hour's length I ever heard. My old with- 
ered dry eyes are full of tears yet. 

If he writes it out anything like he delivered it, our people 
shall see a good many copies of it. 

Yours truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



42 LETTER TO JOSEPHUS HEWETT, 1848 



LETTER TO JOSEPHUS HEWETT 

Josephus Hewett had been a preacher and later a lawyer in Illinois, com- 
ing to Sangamon County in 1830 and reading law with Stephen T. Logan, 
Lincoln's second law partner. He removed to Natchez, Mississippi, about 
1840, where he established a successful law practice. The reference to the 
horseback ride from Tremont to Springfield, a distance of about eighty 
miles, is to the days when Lincoln and his associates at the law rode from 
county to county following the court and trying cases for such clients as 
employed them after they reached town. This letter is one of the earliest 
references in Lincoln's writings to the Constitution of the United States, 
and shows his familiarity with that document. 

Washington, February 13, 1848. 

Dear Hewett : Your Whig representative from Missis- 
sippi, D. W. Tompkins, has just shown me a letter of yours 
to him. I am jealous because you did not write to me — 
perhaps you have forgotten me. Don't you remember a 
long black fellow who rode on horseback with you from 
Tremont to Springfield nearly ten years ago, swimming our 
horses over the Mackinaw on the trip .? Well, I am that same 
one fellow yet. I was once of your opinion, expressed in 
your letter, that presidential electors should be dispensed 
.with, but a more thorough knowledge of the causes that 
first introduced them has made me doubt. The causes were 
brieHy these : The convention that framed the Constitution 
had this difficulty : the small states wished to so form the 
new government as that they might be equal to the large 
ones, regardless of the inequality of population ; the large 
ones insisted on equality in proportion to population. They 
compromised it by basing the House of Representatives on 
population, and the Senate on states regardless of population, 
and the execution of both principles by electors in each 
state, equal in number to her Senators and Representatives. 

Now throw away the machinery of electors and this com- 
promise is broken up and the whole yielded to the principle 
of the larger states. There is one thing more. In the slave 



LETTERS TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 43 

states you have representatives, and consequently electors, 
partly upon the basis of your slave population, which would 
be swept away by the change you seem to think desirable. 
Have you ever reflected on these things ? 

But to come to the main point. I wish you to know that I 
have made a speech in Congress, and that I want you to be 
enlightened by reading it ; to further which object I send you 
a copy of the speech by this mail. 

For old acquaintance's sake, if for nothing else, be sure to 
write to me on receiving this. I was very near forgetting to 
tell you that on my being introduced to General Quitman and 
telling him I was from Springfield, Illinois, he at once re- 
marked, *'Then you know my valued friend Hewett of 
Natchez " ; and on being assured I did, he said just such 
things about you as I like to hear said about my own valued 
friends. 

Yours as ever, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTERS TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 

In these next two letters to Herndon, note Lincoln's political astuteness, 
his belief in frankness and sincerity in politics, and his appreciation of 
the efficiency of the younger men in political struggles. The letters, like 
many others, are interesting because of their revelation of Lincoln's real 
nature and especially of Lincoln's modesty, almost humility, and his evi- 
dent notion that, at thirty-nine, he was beginning to be too old for success- 
ful political activity. 

Washington, June 22, 1848. 

As to the young men. You must not wait to be brought 
forward by the older men. For instance, do you suppose 
that I should ever have got into notice if I had waited to be 
hunted up and pushed forward by older men ? You young 
men get together and form a "Rough and Ready Club," 
and have regular meetings and speeches. Take in every- 



44 LETTERS TO W. H. HERN DON, 1848 

body you can get. Harrison Grimsley, L. A. Enos, Lee 
Kimball, and C. W. Matheny will do to begin the thing; 
but as you go along gather up all the shrewd, wild boys about 
town, whether just of age or a little under age, — Chris. 
Logan, Reddick Ridgley, Lewis Zwizler, and hundreds 
such. Let every one play the part he can play best, — some 
speak, some sing, and all "holler." Your meetings will be 
of evenings ; the older men, and the women, will go to hear 
you ; so that it will not only contribute to the election of 
*'01d Zach," ^ but will be an interesting pastime, and improv- 
ing to the intellectual faculties of all engaged. Don't fail 
to do this. 



Washington, July 10, 1848. 

Dear William : Your letter . . . was received last 
night. The subject of that letter is exceedingly painful to 
me; and I cannot but think there is some mistake in your 
impression of the motives of the old men. I suppose I am 
now one of the old men ; and I declare, on my veracity, which 
I think is good with you, that nothing could afford me more 
satisfaction than to learn that you and others of my young 
friends at home are doing battle in the contest, and endearing 
themselves to the people, and taking a stand far above any 
I have ever been able to reach in their admiration. I cannot 
conceive that other old men feel differently. Of course I 
cannot demonstrate what I say. The way for a young man 
to rise is to improve himself every way he can, never suspect- 
ing that anybody wishes to hinder him. Allow me to assure 
you that suspicion and jealousy never did help any man in 
any situation. There may sometimes be ungenerous attempts 
to keep a young man down ; and they will succeed, too, if he 
allows his mind to be diverted from its true channel to brood' 
over the attempted injury. Cast about, and see if this 

^ General Zachary Taylor, Whig candidate for President. 



SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 45 

feeling has not injured every person you have ever known 
to fall into it. 

Now, in what I have said I am sure you will suspect nothing 
but sincere friendship. I would save you from a fatal error. 
You have been a laborious, studious young man. You are 
far better informed on almost all subjects than I have been. 
You cannot fail in any laudable object, unless you allow your 
mind to be improperly directed. I have somewhat the 
advantage of you in the world's experience, merely by being 
older; and it is this that induces me to advise. . . . 

Your friend, as ever, 

A. LiNCOiN. 



FROM A SPEECH IN CONGRESS, JULY 27, 1848, ON THE 
CANDIDACY OF ZACHARY TAYLOR FOR PRESIDENT 

This is a congressional "stump speech," not to be taken at all seriously. 
Taylor was Lincoln's candidate for the presidency and Cass was seeking 
the Democratic nomination for the same office, and in a long public career 
had done many things which laid him open to Lincoln's attacks, here so 
humorously and so effectively made. The speech is valuable as a contribu- 
tion to Lincoln's autobiography showing that he looked upon his own 
experiences as an Indian fighter as an amusing and a pleasant memory but 
by no means believed that they entitled him, as a sort of tin soldier, to 
any claim to military fame. Lincoln evidently did not believe that a man's 
military achievements necessarily fitted him for civil responsibilities. 

o . . But in my hurry I was very near closing this subject of 
military tails before I was done with it. There is one entire 
article of the sort I have not discussed yet, — I mean the 
military tail you Democrats are now engaged in dovetailing 
into the great Michigander [General Lewis Cass]. Yes, 
sir; all his biographies (and they are legion) have him in 
hand, tying him to a military tail, like so many mischievous 
boys tying a dog to a bladder of beans. True the material 
they have is very limited, but they drive at it might and main. 
He invaded Canada without resistance, and he ow/vaded it 



46 SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 

without pursuit. As he did both under orders, I suppose 
there was to him neither credit nor discredit in them; but 
they constitute a large part of the tail. He was not at Hull's 
surrender, but he was close by; he was volunteer aid to 
General Harrison on the day of the battle of the Thames; 
and as you said in 1840 Harrison was picking huckleberries 
two miles off while the battle was fought, I suppose it is a 
just conclusion with you to say Cass was aiding Harrison to 
pick huckleberries. This is about all, except the mooted 
question of the broken sword. Some authors say he broke 
it, some say he threw it away, and some others, who ought to 
know, say nothing about it. Perhaps it would be a fair 
historical compromise to say, if he did not break it, he did 
not do anything else with it. 

By the way, Mr. Speaker, did you know I am a military 
hero? Yes, sir; in the days of the Black Hawk war I 
fought, bled, and came away. Speaking of General Cass's 
career reminds me of my own. I was not at Stillman's 
defeat, but I was about as near it as Cass was to Hull's 
surrender; and, like him, I saw the place very soon after- 
ward. It is quite certain I did not break my sword, for I 
had none to break ; but I bent a musket pretty badly on one 
occasion. If Cass broke his sword, the idea is he broke it in 
desperation ; I bent the musket by accident. If General 
Cass went in advance of me in picking huckleberries, I guess 
I surpassed him in charges upon the wild onions. If he saw 
any live, fighting Indians, it was more than I did ; but I 
had a good many bloody struggles with the mosquitoes, 
and although I never fainted from the loss of blood, I can 
truly say I was often very hungry. Mr. Speaker, if I should 
ever conclude to doff whatever our Democratic friends may 
suppose there is of black-cockade federalism about me, and 
therefore they shall take me up as their candidate for the 
presidency, I protest they shall not make fun of me, as they 
have of General Cass, by attempting to write me into a 
military hero. ... 



SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 47 

Mr. Speaker, I adopt the suggestion of a friend, that General 
Cass is a general of splendidly successful charges — charges 
to be sure, not upon the public enemy, but upon the public 
treasury. He was Governor of Michigan Territory, and 
ex-officio Superintendent of Indian Affairs, from the 9th of 
October, 1813, till the 31st of July, 1831 — a period of 
seventeen years, nine months, and twenty-two days. During 
this period he received from the United States treasury, for 
personal services and personal expenses, the aggregate sum 
of ninety-six thousand and twenty-eight dollars, being an 
average of fourteen dollars and seventy-nine cents per day 
for every day of the time. This large sum was reached by 
assuming that he was doing service at several different places, 
and in several different capacities in the same place, all at 
the same time. By a correct analysis of his accounts during 
that period, the following propositions may be deduced : 

First. He was paid in three different capacities during the 
whole of the time ; that is to say — (i) As governor's salary 
at the rate per year of ^2,000. (2) As estimated for office, 
rent, clerk hire, fuel, etc., in superintendence of Indian 
affairs in Michigan, at the rate per year of ^1,500. (3) As 
compensation and expenses for various miscellaneous items 
of Indian service out of Michigan, an average per year of 
^625. 

Second. During part of the time — that is, from the 
9th of October, 1 8 1 3 , to the 29th of May, 1822 — he was paid 
in four different capacities ; that is to say, the three as above, 
and, in addition thereto, the commutation of ten rations per 
day, amounting per year to ^730. 

Third, During another part of the time — that is, from 
the beginning of 1822 to the 31st of July, 1831 — ^ he w^as 
also paid in four different capacities ; that is to say, the first 
three, as above (the rations being dropped after the 29th of 
May, 1822), and, in addition thereto, for superintending 
Indian Agencies at Piqua, Ohio; Fort Wayne, Indiana; 
and Chicago, Illinois, at the rate per year of ^1,500. It 



48 SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 1848 

should be observed here that the last item, commencing at 
the beginning of 1822, and the item of rations, ending on the 
29th of May, 1822, lap on each other during so much of the 
time as lies between those two dates. 

Fourth. Still another part of the time — that is, from the 
31st of October, 1821, to the 29th of May, 1822 — he was 
paid in six different capacities; that is to say, the three 
first, as above; the item of rations, as above; and, in addi- 
tion thereto, another item of ten rations per day while at 
Washington settling his accounts, being at the rate per year 
of ^730; and also an allowance for expenses traveling to and 
from Washington, and while there, of ^1,022, being at the 
rate per year of $1,793. 

Fifth. And yet during the little portion of the time 
which lies between the ist of January, 1822, and the 29th of 
May, 1822, he was paid in seven different capacities; that is 
to say, the six last mentioned, and also, at the rate of $1,500 
per year, for the Piqua, Fort Wayne, and Chicago service, 
as mentioned above. . . . 

I have introduced General Cass's accounts here chiefly to 
show the wonderful physical capacities of the man. They 
show that he not only did the labor of several men at the 
same time, but that he often did it at several places, many 
hundreds of miles apart, at the same time. And at eating, 
too, his capacities are shown to be quite as wonderful. 
From October, 1821, to May, 1822, he eat ten rations a day 
in Michigan, ten rations a day here in Washington, and near 
five dollars' worth a day on the road between the two places ! 
And then there is an important discovery in his example — • 
the art of being paid for what one eats, instead of having to 
pay for it. Hereafter if any nice young man should owe a 
bill which he cannot pay in any other way, he can just board 
it out. Mr. Speaker, we have all heard of the animal stand- 
ing in doubt between two stacks of hay and starving to death. 
The like of that would never happen to General Cass. Place 
the stacks a thousand miles apart, he would stand stock- 



LETTER TO J. M. CLAYTON, 1849 49 

still midway between them, and eat them both at once, and 
the green grass along the line would be apt to suffer some, 
too, at the same time. By all means make him President, 
gentlemen. He will feed you bounteously — if — if there is 
any left after he shall have helped himself. . . . 

I have heard some things from New York ; and if they are 
true, one might well say of your party there, as a drunken 
fellow once said when he heard the reading of an indictment 
for hog-stealing. The clerk read on till he got to and through 
the words, ''did steal, take, and carry away ten boars, ten 
sows, ten shoats, and ten pigs," at which he exclaimed, 
"Well, by golly, that is the most equally divided gang of 
hogs I ever did hear of !" If there is any other gang of hogs 
more equally divided than the Democrats of New York are 
about this time, I have not heard of it. 



LETTER TO HON. JOHN M. CLAYTON 

This letter throws a new Hght upon its author's political views. Always a 
hero-worshiper, Lincoln had been a lifelong admirer of Andrew Jackson. 
With all of his deference to the opinions of others and his apparent willingness 
to efface himself, it is characteristic of Abraham Lincoln that when the time 
for decision came he was ready to assume the responsibility for his decisions 
and for his acts. This was illustrated when he rejected Seward's suggestion 
of a dictatorship, and when he revoked the orders of Generals Fremont and 
Hunter freeing certain slaves, and in many other instances which might be 
cited. It is believed that this letter is not published in any other collection 
of Lincoln's writings. 

Springfield, III., July 28th, 1849. 
Hon. J. M. Clayton, 
Sec'y of State, 

Dear Sir : It is with some hesitation I presume to address 
you this letter — and yet I wish not only you, but the whole 
cabinet, and the President too, would consider the subject 
matter of it — my being among the people while you 
and they are not, will excuse the apparent presumption. 

LINCOLN — 4 



50 MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE, 1850 

It is understood that the President at first adopted, as a 
general rule, to throw the responsibility of the appointments 
upon the respective Departments ; and that such rule is 
adhered to and practiced upon. This course I at first thought 
proper; and, of course, I am not now complaining of it. 
Still I am disappointed with the effect of it upon the public 
mind. It is fixing for the President the unjust and ruinous 
character of being a mere man of straw. This must be 
arrested, or it will damn us all inevitably. It is said Gen. 
Taylor and his officers held a council of war at Palo Alto 
(I believe) ; and that he then fought the battle against 
unanimous opinion of those officers — this fact (no matter 
whether rightfully or wrongfully) gives him more popularity 
than ten thousand submissions, however really v/ise and 
magnanimous those submissions may be. The appoint- 
ments need be no better than they have been, but the public 
must be brought to understand, that they are the President's 
appointments. He must occasionally say, or seem to say, 
"by the Eternal," "I take the responsibility." Those 
phrases were the "Samson's locks" of Gen. Jackson, and we 
dare not disregard the lessons of experience. 

Your Ob't Sev't. 

A. Lincoln. 



MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE 

These notes, in thelight of their writer's history, seem autobiographicaL 
Expressed in a modesty that was almost humble, they reveal Lincoln's 
qualities as a lawyer : diligence in the pursuit of the one thing in hand, — as 
though he bore in mind St. Paul's motto, "This one thing I do," — persist- 
ence in self-training as a debater and speaker, absolute integrity in his re- 
lations with men and his reckoning with his own conscience, and a willingness 
to yield much for the sake of peace and fair dealing. All these were his own 
professional ideals. The rules of conduct here laid down he applied to his 
own practice and following them, he gained a place at the head of the bar 
of Illinois. The reported decisions of the Illinois supreme court contain 
175 of Lincoln's cases. Besides these he appeared in the federal courts 
in Illinois and other states, in many important suits, and in the Supreme 



MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE, 1850 51 

Court of the United States. The dominant characteristic of his legal 
argument was crystal clearness, and in his manner of presentation he dis- 
played absolute fairness toward the other side and frank sincerity toward 
the court. His disposition to undervalue his own services kept him a 
poor man at a time when by making reasonable charges he could have made 
himself comfortably rich. As an advocate he was much sought after, trying 
cases in every part of his own state. His success in presenting his cases to 
the jury did not lead him into the error which he condemns in this lecture of 
"relying too much on speech-making." While he studied human nature 
in his juries and on the witness stand, and prepared his most trifling cases 
with scrupulous care, he found time for the mastery of the great questions of 
constitutional law, until he was able to demonstrate by his Cooper Institute 
speech (page 112) and by his handling of the intricate legal problems of the 
Civil War, that he was one of the foremost constitutional lawyers of his time. 

In this connection, read the letters to Isham Reavis, November 5, 1855 (P- 
64) and to James T. Thornton, December 2, 1858 (p. 109). 

His fairness to his opponent in the trial of causes gave him the confidence of 
the court and of the bar and won him the popular title "Honest Abe Lin- 
coln." In the statement of his case to the court or jury it was a common 
thing for his opponent to submit his case for trial on Lincoln's presentation 
of the facts. A fair illustration of his disposition is found in a letter to 
Senator Lyman Trumbull written in 1857 {yj Century Magazine^ p. 620) : 
"This notice is not required by law, and I am giving it merely because I 
thmk fairness requires it." 



I am not an accomplished lawyer. I find quite as much 
material for a lecture in those points wherein I have failed, 
as in those wherein I have been moderately successful. The 
leading rule for a lawyer, as for the man of every other call- 
ing, is diligence. Leave nothing for to-morrow which can be 
done to-day. Never let your correspondence fall behind. 
Whatever piece of business you have in hand, before stop- 
ping, do all the labor pertaining to it which can then be done. 
When you bring a common-law suit, if you have the facts for 
doing so, write the declaration at once. If a law point be 
involved, examine the books, and note the authority you 
rely on upon the declaration itself, where you are sure to 
find it when wanted. The same of defenses and pleas. In 
business not likely to be litigated, — ordinary collection 
cases, foreclosures, partitions, and the like, — make all 



52 MEMORANDUM FOR LAW LECTURE, 1850 

examinations of titles, and note them and even draft orders 
and decrees in advance. This course has a triple advantage; 
it avoids omissions and neglect, saves your labor when once 
done, performs the labor out of court when you have leisure, 
rather than in court when you have not. 

Extemporaneous speaking should be practiced and cul- 
tivated. It is the lawyer's avenue to the public. However 
able and faithful he may be in other respects, people are 
slow to bring him business if he cannot make a speech. 
And yet there is not a more fatal error to young lawyers 
than relying too much on speech-making. If any one, upon 
his rare powers of speaking, shall claim an exemption from 
the drudgery of the law, his case is a failure in advance. 

Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to 
compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how 
the nominal winner is often a real loser — in fees, expenses, 
and waste of time. As a peace-maker the lawyer has a 
superior opportunity of being a good man. There will 
still be business enough. 

Never stir up litigation. A worse man can scarcely be 
found than one who does this. Who can be more nearly 
a fiend than he who habitually overhauls the register of 
deeds in search of defects in titles, whereon to stir up strife, 
and put money in his pocket ^ A moral tone ought to be 
infused into the profession which should drive such men out 
of it. 

The matter of fees is important, far beyond the mere 
question of bread and butter involved. Properly attended 
to, fuller justice is done to both lawyer and client. An 
exorbitant fee should never be claimed. As a general 
rule, never take your whole fee in advance, nor any more 
than a small retainer. When fully paid beforehand, you 
are more than a common mortal if you can feel the same 
interest in the case as if something was still in prospect for 
you, as well as for your client. And when you lack interest 
in the case the job will very likely lack skill and diligence in 



LETTERS TO J. D. JOHNSTON, 1S51 53 

the performance. Settle the amount of fee and take a note 
in advance. Then you will feel that you are working for 
something, and you are sure to do your work faithfully and 
well. Never sell a fee-note — at least not before the con- 
sideration service is performed. It leads to negligence and 
dishonesty — negligence by losing interest in the case, and 
dishonesty in refusing to refund when you have allowed the 
consideration to fail. 

There is a vague popular belief that lawyers are neces- 
sarily dishonest. I say vague, because when we consider 
to what extent confidence and honors are reposed in and 
conferred upon lawyers by the people, it appears improbable 
that their impression of dishonesty is very distinct and vivid. 
Yet the impression is common, almost universal. Let no 
young man choosing the law for a calling for a moment yield 
to the popular belief. Resolve to be honest at all events; 
and if in your own judgment you cannot be an honest lawyer, 
resolve to be honest without being a lawyer. Choose some 
other occupation, rather than one in the choosing of which 
you do, in advance, consent to be a knave. 



LETTERS TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON 

John D. Johnston was the son of Lincoln's stepmother. He had grown 
up with Abraham Lincoln in the log-cabin days in Indiana, and had 
migrated to Illinois with the Lincoln party in 1830. He had the restless, 
thriftless irresponsibility of the chronic emigrant who fancied he could 
gain social betterment without working for it. These and other letters 
show that Lincoln was patient with his brother's failings, and, despite his 
own poverty, continued to share what he had with his less deserving kin. 



January 2, 1851. 

Dear Johnston : Your request for eighty dollars I do 
not think it best to comply with now. At the various times 
when I have helped you a little you have said to me, "We 
can get along very well now"; but in a very short time I 



54 LETTERS TO J. D. JOHNSTON, 1851 

find you in the same difficulty again. Now, this can only 
happen by some defect in your conduct. What that defect 
is, I think I know. You are not lazy, and still you are an 
idler. I doubt whether, since I saw you, you have done a 
good whole day's work in any one day. You do not very 
much dislike to work, and still you do not work much, 
merely because it does not seem to you that you could get 
much for it. This habit of uselessly wasting time is the 
whole difficulty ; it is vastly important to you, and still 
more so to your children, that you should break the habit. 
It is more important to them, because they have longer to 
live, and can keep out of an idle habit before they are in it, 
easier than they can get out after they are in. 

You are now in need of some money; and what I propose 
is, that you shall go to work, "tooth and nail," for somebody 
who will give you money for it. Let father and your boys 
take charge of your things at home, prepare for a crop, and 
make a crop, and you go to work for the best money wages, 
or in discharge of any debt you owe, that you can get ; and, 
to secure you a fair reward for your labor, I now promise 
you, that for every dollar you will, between this and the 
first of May, get for your own labor, either in money or as 
your own indebtedness, I will then give you one other dollar. 
By this, if you hire yourself at ten dollars a month, from me 
you will get ten more, making twenty dollars a month for 
your work. In this I do not mean you shall go off to St. 
Louis, or the lead mines, or the gold mines in California, but 
I mean for you to go at it for the best wages you can get close 
to home in Coles County. Now, if you will do this, you will 
be soon out of debt, and, what is better, you will have a habit 
that will keep you from getting in debt again. But, if I 
should now clear you out of debt, next year you would be just 
as deep in as ever. You say you would almost give your 
place in heaven for seventy or eighty dollars. Then you 
value your place in heaven very cheap, for I am sure you can, 
with the offer I make, get the seventy or eighty dollars for 



LETTERS TO J. D. JOHNSTON, 1851 55 

four or five months' work. You say if I will furnish you the 
money you will deed me the land, and, if you don't pay the 
money back, you will deliver possession. Nonsense ! If 
you can't now live with the land, how will you then live 
without it ? You have always been kind to me, and I do 
not mean to be unkind to you. On the contrary, if you will 
but follow my advice, you will find it worth more than eighty 
times eighty dollars to you. 

Affectionately your brother, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON AND TO HIS MOTHER 

Shelbyville, November 4, 1851. 

Dear Brother: When I came into Charleston day before 
yesterday, I learned that you are anxious to sell the land 
where you live and move to Missouri. I have been thinking 
of this ever since, and cannot but think such a notion is 
utterly foolish. What can you do in Missouri better than 
here ? Is the land any richer 1 Can you there, any more 
than here, raise corn and wheat and oats without work .? 
Will anybody there, any more than here, do your work for 
you .? If you intend to go to work, there is no better place 
than right where you are ; if you do not intend to go to work, 
you cannot get along anywhere. Squirming and crawling 
about from place to place can do no good. You have raised 
no crop this year; and what you really want is to sell the 
land, get the money, and spend it. Part with the land you 
have, and, my life upon it, you will never after own a spot big 
enough to bury you in. Half you will get for the land you 
will spend in moving to Missouri, and the other half you will 
eat, drink, and wear out, and no foot of land will be bought. 
Now, I feel it my duty to have no hand in such a piece of 
foolery. I feel that it is so even on your own account, and 
particularly on mother's account. The eastern forty acres 



56 SPEECH AT PEORIA, 1854 

I intend to keep for mother while she lives ; if you will not 
cultivate it, it will rent for enough to support her — at least, 
it will rent for something. Her dower in the other two 
forties she can let you have, and no thanks to me. Now, 
do not misunderstand this letter; I do not write it in any 
unkindness. I write it in order, if possible, to get you to 
face the truth, which truth is, you are destitute because you 
have idled away all your time. Your thousand pretenses for 
not getting along better are all nonsense ; they deceive no- 
body but yourself. Go to work is the only cure for your case. 
A word to mother. Chapman tells me he wants you to 
go and live with him. If I were you I would try it awhile. 
If you get tired of it (as I think you will not), you can return 
to your own home. Chapman feels very kindly to you, and 
I have no doubt he will make your situation very pleasant. 

Sincerely your son, 

A. Lincoln. 

SPEECH IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS AT PEORIA 

October 16, 1854. 

. . . This declared indifference, but, as I must think, 
covert, real zeal, for the spread of slavery, I cannot but 
hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery 
itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example 
of its just influence in the world, enables the enemies of free 
institutions with plausibility to taunt us as hypocrites, 
causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and 
especially because it forces so many good men among 
ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental prin- 
ciples of civil liberty, criticizing the Declaration of Independ- 
ence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action 
but self-interest. 

Before proceeding let me say that I think I have, no preju- 
dice against the Southern people. They are just what we 
would be in their situation. If slavery did not now exist 



SPEECH AT PEORIA, 1854 57 

among them, they would not introduce it. If it did now 
exist among us, we should not instantly give it up. This 
I believe of the masses North and South. Doubtless there 
are individuals on both sides who would not hold slaves 
under any circumstances, and others who would gladly 
introduce slavery anew if it were out of existence. . . . 

When Southern people tell us they are no more responsible 
for the origin of slavery than we are, I acknowledge the fact. 
When it is said that the institution exists, and that it is very 
difficult to get rid of it in any satisfactory way, I can under- 
stand and appreciate the saying. I surely will not blame 
them for not doing what I should not know how to do myself. 
If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what 
to do as to the existing institution. My first impulse would 
be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their 
own native land. But a moment's reflection would convince 
me that whatever of high hope (as I think there is) there 
may be in this in the long run, its sudden execution is impos- 
sible. If they were all landed there in a day, they would all 
perish in the next ten days ; and there are not surplus ship- 
ping and surplus money enough to carry them there in many 
times ten days. What then .? Free them all, and keep 
them among us as underlings ? Is it quite certain that this 
betters their condition ? I think I would not hold one in 
slavery at any rate, yet the point is not clear enough for me 
to denounce people upon. What next .? Free them, and 
make them politically and socially our equals } My own 
feelings will not admit of this, and if mine would, we well 
know that those of the great mass of whites will not. 
Whether this feeling accords with justice and sound judg- 
ment is not the sole question, if indeed it is any part of it. 
A universal feeling, whether well or ill founded, cannot be 
safely disregarded. We cannot then make them equals. 
It does seem to me that systems of gradual emancipation 
might be adopted, but for their tardiness in this I will not 
undertake to judge our brethren of the South. . . . 



58 LETTER TO GEORGE ROBERTSON, 1855 

FROM A LETTER TO GEORGE ROBERTSON OF LEXINGTON, 

KENTUCKY 

The introduction to this letter refers to a speech of the Hon. George 
Robertson, made long before, on the Missouri Compromise. The value of 
this letter is that in the last paragraph the writer first gives expression to the 
idea advanced in the famous "House Divided" speech of June 17, 1858 
(p. 68), namely the expression of the query, "Can we as a nation continue 
together pertnanently, half slave, and half free V 

Robertson was at this time a lecturer in law in Transylvania University. 
He had been a member of Congress, participating there in slavery legislation. 
Later he was for many years a member of the legislature and chief justice 
of Kentucky, and author of a number of books of biography, and on law and 
politics, 

Springfield, Illinois, August 15, 1855. 

My dear Sir : . . . You are not a friend of slavery in 
the abstract. In that speech you spoke of "the peaceful 
extinction of slavery" and used other expressions indicating 
your belief that the thing was, at some time, to have an end. 
Since then we have had thirty-six years of experience; and 
this experience has demonstrated, I think, that there is no 
peaceful extinction of slavery in prospect for us. The 
signal failure of Henry Clay and other good and great men, 
in 1849, to effect anything in favor of gradual emancipation 
in Kentucky, together with a thousand other signs, extin- 
guished that hope utterly. On the question of liberty, as 
a principle, we are not what we have been. When we were 
the political slaves of King George, and wanted to be free, 
we called the maxim that "all men are created equal" a 
self-evident truth, but now when we have grown fat, and 
have lost all dread of being slaves ourselves, we have become 
so greedy to be masters that we call the same maxim "a self- 
evident lie." The Fourth of July has not quite dwindled 
away ; it is still a great day — for burning fire-crackers ! 

That spirit which desired the peaceful extinction of 
slavery has itself become extinct with the occasion and 
the men of the Revolution. Under the impulse of that occa- 



LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 59 

slon, nearly half the states adopted systems of emancipation 
at once, and it is a significant fact that not a single state 
has done the like since. So far as peaceful, voluntary 
emancipation is concerned, the condition of the negro slave 
in America, scarcely less terrible to the contemplation of a 
free mind, is now as fixed and hopeless of change for the better 
as that of the lost souls of the finally impenitent. The 
Autocrat of all the Russias will resign his crown and pro- 
claim his subjects free republicans,^ sooner than will our 
American masters voluntarily give up their slaves. 

Our political problem now is, "Can we as a nation continue 
together permanently — forever — half slave, and half free ?" 
The problem is too mighty for me — may God in his mercy 
superintend the solution. 

Your much obliged friend, and humble servant, 

A. Lincoln. 



FROM A LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 

Note the reference to the effect of seeing slaves shackled together: 
"That sight was a continued torment to me." Although he thus felt the 
horror of slavery he was willing to concede the rights of the South under 
the Constitution and to wait until the end of slavery could be brought 
about by constitutional means. Because of this attitude, Lincoln became 
known in antislavery audiences in New England as "The Slave Hound 
of Illinois " ; and for years bore with singular patience the criticism and 
abuse of the radical Abolitionists of the North. 

Andrew H. Reeder, here mentioned, was appointed by President Franklin 
Pierce as first governor of Kansas. He tried to protect the integrity of 
the ballot, became a Liberty man, was elected senator from Kansas, 1856, 
but his election was not recognized by Congress. President Lincoln in 1861 
made him a brigadier general. 

Springfield, August 24, 1855. 
Dear Speed : You know what a poor correspondent I am. 
Ever since I received your very agreeable letter of the 22d 

^ The Czar of Russia emancipated the serfs on March 3, 1861 ; so this 
prophecy came true. 



6o LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 

of May I have been intending to write you an answer to it. 
You suggest that in poHtical action now, you and I would 
differ. I suppose we would ; not quite so much, however, 
as you may think. You know I dislike slavery, and you 
fully admit the abstract wrong of it. So far there is no 
cause of difference. But you say that sooner than yield 
your legal right to the slave, especially at the bidding of 
those who are not themselves interested, you would see the 
Union dissolved. I am not aware that any one is bidding 
you yield that right ; very certainly I am not. I leave that 
matter entirely to yourself. I also acknowledge your rights 
and my obligations under the Constitution in regard to your 
slaves. I confess I hate to see the poor creatures hunted 
down and caught and carried back to their stripes and unre- 
quited toil ; but I bite my lips and keep quiet. In 1841, you 
and I had together a tedious low-water trip on a steamboat, 
from Louisville to St. Louis. You may remember, as I well 
do, that from Louisville to the mouth of the Ohio, there were 
on board ten or a dozen slaves shackled together with irons. 
That sight was a continued torment to me, and I see some- 
thing like it every time I touch the Ohio or any other slave 
border. It is not fair for you to assume that I have no inter- 
est in a thing which has, and continually exercises, the power 
of making me miserable. You ought rather to appreciate 
how much the great body of the Northern people do crucify 
their feelings in order to maintain their loyalty to the Con- 
stitution and the Union. I do oppose the extension of slavery, 
because my judgment and feeling so prompt me, and I am 
under no obligations to the contrary. If for this you and 
I must differ, differ we must. You say if you were President, 
you would send an army and hang the leaders of the Missouri 
outrages upon the Kansas elections ; still, if Kansas fairly 
votes herself a slave state she must be admitted, or the Union 
must be dissolved. But how if she votes herself a slave 
state unfairly ; that is, by the very means for which you say 
you would hang men ? Must she still be admitted, or the 



LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 6 1 

Union dissolved ? That will be the phase of the question 
when it first becomes a practical one. In your assumption 
that there may be a fair decision of the slavery question in 
Kansas, I plainly see that you and I would differ about the 
Nebraska law. I look upon that enactment, not as a law, 
but as a violence from the beginning. It was conceived in 
violence, is maintained in violence, and is being executed in 
violence. I say it was conceived in violence, because the 
destruction of the Missouri Compromise, under the circum- 
stances, was nothing less than violence. It was passed in 
violence, because it could not have passed at all but for the 
votes of many members in violence of the known will of 
their constituents. It is maintained in violence, because 
the elections since clearly demand its repeal, and the demand 
is openly disregarded. 

You say men ought to be hung for the way they are 
executing the law; I say that the way it is being executed 
is quite as good as any of its antecedents. It is being 
executed in the precise way which was intended from the 
first, else why does no Nebraska man express astonishment 
or condemnation ? Poor Reeder ^ is the only public man who 
has been silly enough to believe that anything like fairness 
was ever intended, and he has been bravely undeceived. 

That Kansas will form a slave constitution, and with it 
will ask to be admitted into the Union, I take to be already 
a settled question, and so settled by the very means you so 
pointedly condemn. By every principle of law ever held by 
any court North or South, every negro taken to Kansas is 
free ; yet in utter disregard of this, — in the spirit of violence 
merely, — that beautiful legislature gravely passes a law to 
hang any man who shall venture to inform a negro of his 
legal rights. This is the subject and real object of the law. 
If, like Haman, they should hang upon the gallows of their 

1 Andrew H. Reeder was the first territorial governor of Kansas and in 
1855 was removed from office by President Buchanan because he attempted 
to protect the antislavery party in the territorial election. 



62 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 

own building, I shall not be among the mourners for their 
fate. In my humble sphere, I shall advocate the restoration 
of the Missouri Compromise so long as Kansas remains a 
territory, and when, by all these foul means, it seeks to 
come into the Union as a slave state, I shall oppose it. I 
am very loath in any case to withhold my assent to the enjoy- 
ment of property acquired or located in good faith ; but I do 
not admit that good faith in taking a negro to Kansas to be 
held in slavery is a probability with any man. Any man 
who has sense enough to be the controller of his own property 
has too much sense to misunderstand the outrageous charac- 
ter of the whole Nebraska business. But I digress. In my 
opposition to the admission of Kansas, I shall have some 
company, but we may be beaten. If we are, I shall not, on 
that account, attempt to dissolve the Union. I think it 
probable, however, we shall be beaten. Standing as a unit 
among yourselves, you can, directly and indirectly, bribe 
enough of our men to carry the day, as you could on the open 
proposition to establish a monarchy. Get hold of some man 
in the North whose position and ability are such that he can 
make the support of your measure, whatever it may be, 
a Democratic-party necessity, and the thing is done. Apropos 
of this, let me tell you an anecdote. Douglas introduced the 
Nebraska bill in January. In February afterward, there 
was a called session of the Illinois legislature. Of the one 
hundred members composing the two branches of that body, 
about seventy were Democrats. These latter held a caucus, 
in which the Nebraska bill was talked of, if not formally 
discussed. It was thereby discovered that just three, and 
no more, were in favor of the measure. In a day or two 
Douglas's orders came on to have resolutions passed approv- 
ing the bill ; and they were passed by large majorities ! ! ! 
The truth of this is vouched for by a bolting Democratic 
member. The masses too, Democratic as well as Whig, were 
even nearer unanimous against it; but as soon as the party 
necessity of supporting it became apparent, the way the 



LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED, 1855 63 ' 

Democrats began to see the wisdom and justice of it was 
perfectly astonishing. 

You say that if Kansas fairly votes herself a free state, 
as a Christian you will rejoice at it. All decent slaveholders 
talk that way, and I do not doubt their candor. But they 
never vote that way. Although in a private letter or con- 
versation you will express your preference that Kansas should 
be free, you would vote for no man for Congress who would 
say the same thing publicly. No such man could be elected 
from any district in a slave state. . . . The slave breeders 
and slave traders are a small, odious, and detested class 
among you ; and yet in politics they dictate the course of all 
of you, and are as completely your masters as you are the 
master of your own negroes. You inquire where I now stand. 
That is a disputed point. I think I am a Whig; but others 
say there are no Whigs, and that I am an Abolitionist. 
When I was at Washington, I voted for the Wilmot Proviso 
as good as forty times ; and I never heard of any one attempt- 
ing to unwhig me for that. I now do no more than oppose 
the extension of slavery. I am not a Know-nothing ; that 
is certain. How could I be .? How can any one who abhors 
the oppression of negroes be in favor of degrading classes 
of white people ? Our progress in degeneracy appears to 
me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring 
that " all men are created equal!^ We now practically read it, 
" all men are created equal except negroes!^ When the Know- 
nothings get control, it will read, " all men are created equal 
except negroes and foreigners and Catholics J'^ When it comes 
to this, I shall prefer emigrating to some country where 
they make no pretense of loving liberty — to Russia, for 
instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and with- 
out the base alloy of hypocrisy. . . . My kindest regards 
to Mrs. Speed. On the leading subject of this letter I have 
more of her sympathy than I have of yours ; and yet let 
me say I am your friend for ever. 

A. Lincoln. 



* 64 LETTER TO I SHAM RE A VIS, 1855 



FROM A LETTER TO ISHAM REAVIS 

See the letter to James T. Thornton (p. 109) ; also memorandum for 
Law Lecture (p. 50). 

Springfield, Nov'r 5, 1855. 
IsHAM Reavis, Esq. 

My dear Sir: — I have just reached home, and found 
your letter of the 23 rd ult. I am from home too much of 
my time, for a young man to read law with me advantage- 
ously. If you are resolutely determined to make a lawyer of 
yourself, the thing is more than half done already. It is 
but a small matter whether you read with anybody or not. 
I did not read with any one. Get the books, and read and 
study them till you understand them in their principal 
features ; and that is the main thing. It is of no conse- 
quence to be in a large town while you are reading. I read 
at New Salem, which never had three hundred people living 
in it. The books, and your capacity for understanding them, 
are just the same in all places. Mr. Dummer is a very clever 
man and an excellent lawyer (much better than I, in law- 
learning) ; and Ihave no doubt he will cheerfully tell you what 
books to read, and also loan you the books. 

Always bear in mind that your own resolution to suc- 
ceed, is more important than any other one thing. 

Very truly your friend, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO RICHARD P. MORGAN 

This is an appHcation for the renewal of his pass as local attorney for 
the Chicago, Alton, & St. Louis — now Chicago & Alton Railway. In his 
practice at the bar, Lincoln was regularly retained by this corporation. 
He was also employed by the Illinois Central, the Atlantic, and the Tonica 
and Petersburg railway companies. 

"Chalked hat" was a colloquial term for a railway pass. 



LETTER TO J. A. BRITTENHAM, 1856. 65 

Richard Price Morgan was then the general superintendent of the railway 
company. The employment by Mr. Morgan is said to have grown out of a 
friendship that sprang up between the men while Lincoln was "traveling the 
circuit" as the result of a little act of hospitality on Mr. Morgan's part at a 
country boarding place where Lincoln, unable to secure quarters for the night, 
was asked to share Mr. Morgan's room and bed. He was a delegate to the 
state convention in i860 where Lincoln's name was first proposed for Presi- 
dent. Mr. Morgan later is said to have designed and planned the elevated 
railroads for the New York Rapid Transit Commission. 

Springfield, February 13, 1856. 

Dear Sir: Says Tom to John: "Here's your old rotten 
wheelbarrow. Fve broke it, usin' on it. I wish you would 
mend it, case I shall want to borrow it this arter-noon." 
Acting on this as a precedent, I say, "Here's your old 
* chalked hat.' I wish you would take it, and send me a new 
one ; case I shall want to use it the first of March." 

Yours truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO J. A. BRITTENHAM 

The following letter is of interest because, in compact form, it shows what a 
close reasoner the author was on political questions. This particular letter 
has never been published, although one in the same language, also marked 
" confidential," appears in the Nicolay and Hay collection of Lincoln's 
writings under date of September 8, 1856, addressed to Harrison Maltby. 
It is apparent that Lincoln was sending this letter to various representative 
supporters of Millard Fillmore, the Whig candidate for President of the 
United States in the national campaign then in progress. 

(Confidential) 

Springfield, Sept. 17, 1856. 
J. A. Brittenham, Esq. 

Dear Sir : I understand you are a Fillmore man. Let 
me prove to you that every vote withheld from Fremont, 
and given to Fillmore, in this state, actually lessens Fillmore's 
chance of being President. 

LINCOLN — 5 



66 LETTER TO J. A. BRITTENHAM, 1856 

Suppose Buchanan gets all the slave states, and Penn- 
sylvania, and any other one state besides ; then he is elected, 
no matter who gets all the rest. 

But suppose Fillmore gets the two slave states of Mary- 
land and Kentucky; then Buchanan is not elected, Fillmore 
goes into the House of Representatives, and may be made 
President by a compromise. 

But suppose again Fillmore's friends throw away a few 
thousand votes on him, in Indiana and Illinois, it will in- 
evitably give these states to Buchanan, which will more than 
compensate him for the loss of Maryland and Kentucky, 
will elect him, and leave Fillmore no chance in the H. R. 
or out of it. 

This is as plain as the adding up of the weights of three 
small hogs. As Mr. Fillmore has no possible chance to carry 
Illinois for himself, it is plainly his interest to let Fremont 
take it, and then keep it out of the hands of Buchanan. 
Be not deceived. Buchanan is the hard horse to beat in this 
race. Let him have Illinois, and nothing can beat him; 
and he will get Illinois, if men persist in throwing away votes 
upon Mr. Fillmore. Does some one persuade you that Mr. 
Fillmore can carry Illinois ? Nonsense ! There are over 
seventy newspapers in Illinois opposing Buchanan, only 
three or four of which support Mr. Fillmore, see the rest 
going for Fremont. Are not these newspapers a fair index 
of the proportion of the voters ? If not, tell me why. 
Again, if these three or four Fillmore newspapers, two at 
least, are supported, in part, by the Buchanan men, as I 
understand, do not they know where the shoe pinches ^ 
They know the Fillmore movement helps them, and therefore 
they help it. Do think these things over, and then act 
according to your judgment. 

Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY, 1858 67 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY, COMPILED FOR THE "DICTIONARY OF 

CONGRESS," JUNE, 1858 

Born, February 12, 1809, in Hardin County, Kentucky. 
Education defective. 
Profession, a lawyer. 

Have been a captain of volunteers in Black Hawk war. 
Postmaster at a very small office. 

Four times a member of the Illinois Legislature, and was a 
member of the lower house of Congress. 

Yours, etc., 

A. Lincoln. 



SPEECH ACCEPTING THE NOMINATION TO THE UNITED 
STATES SENATE, JUNE 16, 1858. — THE "HOUSE DIVIDED'* 
SPEECH 

The introductory paragraph suggests the exordium to Webster's Reply to 
Hayne, deHvered in the Senate of the United States in 1832, and familiar to 
every schoolboy in the North : "When the mariner has been tossed for many 
days in thick weather, and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails himself 
of the first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his lati- 
tude, and ascertain how far the elements have driven him from his true course. 
Let us imitate this prudence, and before we float farther . . . refer to the 
point from which we departed, that we may at least be able to conjecture 
where we now are." 

This speech, contrary to Lincoln's custom, was read from manuscript. 
Mr. Horace White, then a reporter and political correspondent for the 
Chicago Press and Tribune, says of it: Mr. Lincoln "said to me he had 
taken a great deal of pains with the speech and that he wanted it to go before 
the people just as he had prepared it. He added that some of his friends had 
scolded him a good deal about the opening paragraph and 'the house divided 
against itself and wanted him to change it or leave it out altogether, but 
that he believed he had studied this subject more deeply than they had, and 
that he was going to stick to that text whatever happened." Douglas seized 
upon the proposition that the Union would cease to be divided and would 
"become all one thing or all the other" as a declaration of war against 
slavery as a constitutional institution, and the expression of his hope that 



68 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 

the house, admittedly divided against itself, could not stand, and pressed 
the charge of disloyalty upon Lincoln throughout the debating campaign, 
notably at Chicago on June 9, 1858, where he accused Lincoln of advocating 
a war of the sections; see Lincoln's reply, at Bloomington, on July 16, 1858, 
at Jonesboro, on September 15, 1858, and at Galesburg, on October 7, 1858. 
See also Lincoln's rejoinder at Quincy (p. 98). Lincoln's prophecy was 
fulfilled in the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment at the conclusion of 
the Civil War on December 18, 1865. 

The charge which Lincoln makes in this speech, that Douglas had con- 
spired with Chief Justice Taney and the two Presidents, Pierce and Buchanan, 
to use the Dred Scott decision (rendered on March 6, 1857, see U. S. Supreme 
Court Reports, 19 How. 393) for the political advantage of the Demo- 
cratic party, employs one of Lincoln's best illustrations (see p. 73), the figure 
of "a lot of framed timbers" which "exactly make the frame of a house, all 
the tenons and mortises exactly fitting, . . . not a piece too many or too 
few. ... In such a case, we find it impossible not to believe that Stephen 
and Franklin and Roger and James all understood one another from the 
beginning." 

The speech was delivered in the evening of June 16, 1858, at Springfield, 
before the Republican state convention, which earlier in the. same day had 
adopted a resolution declaring "that Abraham Lincoln is the first and only 
choice of the Republicans of Illinois for the United States Senate as the 
successor of Stephen A. Douglas." 

If we could first know where we are, and whither we are 
tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it. 
We are now far into the fifth year since a policy was initiated 
with the avowed object and confident promise of putting 
an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that 
policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has con- 
stantly augmented. In my opinion it will not cease until a 
crisis shall have been reached and passed. *' A house divided 
against itself cannot stand." I believe this government 
cannot endure permanently, half slave and half free. I do 
not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the 
house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It 
will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the op- 
ponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and 
place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it 
is in the course of ultimate extinction ; or its advocates will 



THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 69 

push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the 
states, old as well as new, North as well as South. 

Have we no tendency to the latter condition ? Let any 
one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost com- 
plete legal combination — piece of machinery, so to speak — 
compounded of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott 
decision. Let him consider not only what work the machin- 
ery is adapted to do, and how well adapted ; but also let him 
study the history of its construction, and trace, if he can, or 
rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidences of design and 
concert of action among its chief architects from the begin- 
ning. 

The new year of 1854 found slavery excluded from more 
than half the states by state constitutions, and from most of 
the national territory by congressional prohibition. Four 
days later commenced the struggle which ended in repealing 
that congressional prohibition. This opened all the national 
territory to slavery, and was the first point gained. 

But so far, Congress only had acted; and an indorsement 
by the people, real or apparent, was indispensable to save the 
point already gained and give chance for more. 

This necessity had not been overlooked, but had been 
provided for, as well as might be, in the notable argument 
of Squatter Sovereignty, otherwise called sacred right of self- 
government, which latter phrase, though expressive of the 
only rightful basis of any government, was so perverted 
in this attempted use of it, as to amount to just this : That 
if any one man choose to enslave another, no third man 
shall be allowed to object. That argument was incorporated 
into the Nebraska bill itself, in the language which follows : 
"It being the true intent and meaning of this act, not to 
legislate slavery into any territory or state, nor to exclude 
it therefrom ; but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to 
form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own 
way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." 
Then opened the roar of loose declamation in favor of 



70 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 

Squatter Sovereignty and sacred right of self-government. 
"But," said opposition members, "let us amend the bill so 
as to expressly declare that the people of the territory may 
exclude slavery." "Not we," said the friends of the measure, 
and down they voted the amendment. 

While the Nebraska bill was passing through Congress, 
a law case, involving the question of a negro's freedom, 
by reason of his owner having voluntarily taken him first 
into a free state and then into a territory covered by the 
congressional prohibition, and held him as a slave for a long 
time in each, was passing through the United States Circuit 
Court for the District of Missouri ; and both Nebraska bill 
and lawsuit were brought to a decision, in the same month 
of May, 1854. The negro's name was Dred Scott, which 
name now designates the decision finally made in the 
case. Before the then next presidential election, the law 
case came to, and was argued in, the Supreme Court of 
the United States ; but the decision of it was deferred until 
after the election. Still, before the election, Senator Trum- 
bull, on the floor of the Senate, requested the leading advo- 
cate of the Nebraska bill to state his opinion whether the 
people of a territory can constitutionally exclude slavery 
from their limits, and the latter answers : "That is a question 
for the Supreme Court." 

The election came. Mr. Buchanan was elected, and the 
indorsement, such as it was, secured. That was the second 
point gained. The indorsement, however, fell short of a 
clear popular majority by nearly four hundred thousand 
votes, and so, perhaps, was not overwhelmingly reliable 
and satisfactory. The outgoing President, in his last 
annual message, as impressively as possible echoed back 
upon the people the weight and authority of the indorse- 
ment. The Supreme Court met again ; did not announce 
their decision, but ordered a reargument. The presidential 
inauguration came, and still no decision of the Court ; but 
the incoming President in his inaugural address fervently 



THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 7 1 

exhorted the people to abide by the forthcoming decision, 
whatever it might be. Then, in a few days, came the 
decision. 

The reputed author of the Nebraska bill finds an early 
occasion to make a speech at this capital, indorsing the 
Dred Scott decision, and vehemently denouncing all oppo- 
sition to it. The new President, too, seizes the early occa- 
sion of the Silliman letter to indorse and strongly construe 
that decision, and to express his astonishment that any 
different view had ever been entertained ! 

At length a squabble springs up between the President 
and the author of the Nebraska bill, on the mere question 
of fact whether the Lecompton constitution was, or was not, 
in any just sense, made by the people of Kansas; and in 
that quarrel, the latter declares that all he wants is a fair 
vote for the people, and that he cares not whether slavery 
be voted down or voted up. I do not understand his decla- 
ration that he cares not whether slavery be voted down or 
voted up, to be intended by him other than as an apt defi- 
nition of the policy he would impress upon the public mind 

— the principle for which he declares he has suffered so much, 
and is ready to suffer to the end. And well may he cling 
to that principle. If he has any parental feeling, well may 
he cling to it. That principle is the only shred left of his 
original Nebraska doctrine. Under the Dred Scott decision, 
"squatter sovereignty" squatted out of existence, tumbled 
down like temporary scaffolding — like the mold at the foun- 
dry, served through one blast, and fell back into loose sand, 

— helped to carry an election, and then was kicked to the 
winds. His late joint struggle with the Republicans against 
the Lecompton constitution, involves nothing of the original 
Nebraska doctrine. That struggle was made on a point — 
the right of the people to make their own constitution — 
upon which he and the Republicans have never differed. 

The several points of the Dred Scott decision in connec- 
tion with Senator Douglas's "care not" policy, constitute 



72 THE ''HOUSE DIFIDED" SPEECH, 1858 

the piece of machinery in its present state of advancement. 
This was the third point gained. The working points of that 
machinery are : 

First. That no negro slave, imported as such from Africa, 
and no descendant of such slave, can ever be a citizen of any 
state, in the sense of that term as used in the Constitution 
of the United States. This point is made in order to deprive 
the negro, in every possible event, of the benefit of that 
provision of the United States Constitution which declares 
that "citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privi- 
leges and immunities of citizens in the several States." , 

Secondly. That ''subject to the Constitution of the .j 
United States," neither Congress nor a territorial legislature 
can exclude slavery from any United States territory. 
This point is made in order that individual men may fill up 
the territories with slaves, without danger of losing them as 
property, and thus enhance the chances of permanency to 
the institution through all the future. 

Thirdly. That whether the holding a negro in actual 
slavery in a free state makes him free as against the holder, 
the United States Courts will not decide, but will leave to 
be decided by the courts of any slave state the negro may be 
forced into by the master. This point is made, not to be 
pressed immediately, but if acquiesced in for a while, and 
apparently indorsed by the people at an election, then to 
sustain the logical conclusion that what Dred Scott's master 
might lawfully do with Dred Scott in the free state of Illi- 
nois, every other master may lawfully do, with any other one, 
or one thousand slaves in Illinois, or in any other free state. 

Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, 
the Nebraska doctrine, or what is left of it, is to educate and 
mold public opinion, at least Northern public opinion, not 
to care whether slavery is voted down or voted up. This 
shows exactly where we now are, and partially, also, whither 
we are tending. 

It will throw additional light on the latter, to go back, 



THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 J 2, 

and run the mind over the string of historical facts already 
stated. Several things will now appear less dark and mys- 
terious than they did when they were transpiring. The peo- 
ple were to be left ''perfectly free," "subject only to the 
Constitution." What the Constitution had to do with it, 
outsiders could not then see. Plainly enough now, it was 
an exactly fitted niche for the Dred Scott decision to after- 
ward come in, and declare the perfect freedom of the people 
to be just no freedom at all. Why was the amendment 
expressly declaring the right of the people voted down ? 
Plainly enough now, the adoption of it would have spoiled 
the niche for the Dred Scott decision. Why was the Court 
decision held up ^ Why even a senator's individual opinion 
withheld till after the presidential election 1 Plainly enough 
now, the speaking out then would have damaged the "per- 
fectly free " argument upon which the election was to be 
carried. Why the outgoing President's felicitation on the 
indorsement ? Why the delay of a reargument ? Why the 
incoming President's advance exhortation in favor of the 
decision ? These things look like the cautious patting and 
petting of a spirited horse, preparatory to mounting him, 
when it is dreaded that he may give the rider a fall. And 
why the hasty after-indorsement of the decision by the 
President and others ? 

We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adapta- 
tions are the result of preconcert. But when we see aTot of 
framed timbers, different portions of which we know have 
been gotten out at different times and places, and by differ- 
ent workmen, — Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James,^ 
for instance, — and we see these timbers joined together, 
and see they exactly make the frame of a house or a 
mill, all the tenons and mortises exactly fitting, and all the 
lengths and proportions of the different pieces exactly adapted 

^ Stephen A. Douglas, senator from Illinois; Franklin Pierce, Ex-Presi- 
dent of the United States; Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the United 
States; and James Buchanan, President of the United States. 



74 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 

to their respective places, and not a piece too many or too 
few, not omitting even scaffolding — or if a single piece be 
lacking, we see the place in the frame exactly fitted and 
prepared yet to bring such piece in — in such a case, we 
find it impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin 
and Roger and James all understood one another from the 
beginning, and all worked upon a common plan or draft, 
drawn up before the first blow was struck. 

It should not be overlooked that by the Nebraska bill 
the people of a state as well as territory were to be left 
*' perfectly free,'' "subject only to the Constitution." Why 
mention a state ? They were legislating for territories, and 
not for or about states. Certainly the people of a state are 
and ought to be subject to the Constitution of the United 
States ; but why is mention of this lugged into this merely 
territorial law ^ Why are the people of a territory and the 
people of a state therein lumped together, and their relation 
to the Constitution therein treated as being precisely the 
same ? While the opinion of the Court by Chief Justice 
Taney, in the Dred Scott case, and the separate opinions of 
all the concurring judges, expressly declare that the Consti- 
tution of the United States neither permits Congress nor a 
territorial legislature to exclude slavery from any United 
States territory, they all omit to declare whether or not the 
same Constitution permits a state or the people of a state 
to exclude it. Possibly this is a mere omission ; but who 
can be quite sure if McLean or Curtis had sought to get 
into the opinion a declaration of unlimited power in the 
people of a state to exclude slavery from their limits, 
just as Chase and Mace sought to get such declaration in 
behalf of the people of a territory, into the Nebraska bill — 
I ask, who can be quite sure that it would not have been 
voted down in the one case as it had been in the other .? 
The nearest approach to the point of declaring the power of 
a state over slavery is made by Judge Nelson. He ap- 
proaches it more than once, using the precise idea, and almost 



THE "HOUSE DIVIDED'' SPEECH, 1858 75 

the language too, of the Nebraska act. On one occasion his 
exact language is ''except in cases where the power is re- 
strained by the Constitution of the United States, the law 
of the state is supreme over the subject of slavery within its 
jurisdiction." In what cases the power of the state is so 
restrained by the United States Constitution is left an open 
question, precisely as the same question, as to the restraint 
on the power of the territories, was left open in the Nebraska 
act. Put this and that together, and we have another nice 
little niche, which we may, ere long, see filled with another 
Supreme Court decision, declaring that the Constitution 
of the United States does not permit a state to exclude 
slavery from its limits. And this may especially be expected 
if the doctrine of "care not whether slavery be voted down 
or voted up" shall gain upon the public mind sufficiently to 
give promise that such a decision can be maintained when 
made. 

• Such a decision is all that slavery now lacks of being 
alike lawful in all the states. Welcome or unwelcome, 
such decision is probably coming, and will soon be upon us, 
unless the power of the present political dynasty shall be met 
and overthrown. We shall lie down, pleasantly dreaming 
that the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their 
state free, and we shall awake to the reality instead, that the 
Supreme Court has made Illinois a slave state. To meet and 
overthrow the power of that dynasty is the work now before 
all those who would prevent that consummation. That is 
what we have to do. How can we best do it .? 

There are those who denounce us openly to their own 
friends, and yet whisper us softly that Senator Douglas 
is the aptest instrument there is with which to effect that 
object. They wish us to infer all from the fact that he now 
has a little quarrel with the present head of the dynasty, 
and that he has regularly voted with us on a single point, 
upon which he and we have never differed. They remind us 
that he is a great man and that the largest of us are very 



76 THE ''HOUSE DIVIDED" SPEECH, 1858 

small ones. Let this be granted. But "a living dog is 
better than a dead lion." Judge Douglas, if not a dead 
lion, for this work, is at least a caged and toothless one. 
How can he oppose the advances of slavery .? He don't 
care anything about it. His avowed mission is impressing 
the "public heart" to care nothing about it. A leading 
Douglas Democratic newspaper thinks Douglas's superior 
talent will be needed to resist the revival of the African 
slave trade. Does Douglas believe an effort to revive that 
trade is approaching ? He has not said so. Does he really 
think so t But if it is, how can he resist it ^. For years he 
has labored to prove it a sacred right of white men to take 
negro slaves into the new territories. Can he possibly 
show that it is a less sacred right to buy them where they 
can be bought cheapest ? And unquestionably they can be 
bought cheaper in Africa than in Virginia. He has done 
all in his power to reduce the whole question of slavery to 
one of a mere right of property ; and, as such, how can he; 
oppose the foreign slave trade ? How can he refuse that 
trade in that "property" shall be "perfectly free," unless he 
does it as a protection to home production ? And as the 
home producers will probably not ask the protection, he 
will be wholly without a ground of opposition. 

Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may right- 
fully be wiser to-day than he was yesterday — that he 
may rightfully change when he finds himself wrong. But 
can we, for that reason, run ahead, and infer that he will 
make any particular change, of which he himself has given 
no intimation ? Can we safely base our action upon any 
such vague inference .? 

Now, as ever, I wish not to misrepresent Judge Douglas's 
position, question his motives, or do aught that can be 
personally offensive to him. Whenever, if ever, he and we 
can come together on principle, so that our great cause may 
have assistance from his great ability, I hope to have inter- 
posed no adventitious obstacle. But, clearly, he is not now 



SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 yj 

with us — he does not pretend to be — he does not promise 
ever to be. 

Our cause, then, must be intrusted to, and conducted 
by, its own undoubted friends — those whose hands are 
free, whose hearts are in the work, who do care for the result. 
Two years ago the RepubHcans of the nation mustered over 
thirteen hundred thousand strong. We did this under the 
single impulse of resistance to a common danger, with every 
external circumstance against us. Of strange, discordant, 
and even hostile elements, we gathered from the four winds, 
and formed and fought the battle through, under the con- 
stant hot lire of a disciplined, proud, and pampered enemy. 
Did we brave all then to falter now } — now, when that same 
enemy is wavering, dissevered, and belligerent ? The 
result is not doubtful. We shall not fail — if we stand 
firm, we shall not fail. Wise counsels may accelerate or 
mistakes delay it, but sooner or later the victory is sure to 
come. 



FROM A SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, JULY 17, 1858 

In this speech, only a third of which is here reproduced, Lincoln is answer- 
ing one which he had heard Senator Douglas make at Bloomington on the 
day before. On this same day, Douglas had attacked Lincoln's "House 
Divided" doctrine, had accused Lincoln of seeking to destroy the powers 
of the states by consolidating all the power in the national government, and 
had charged him with disputing the authorit}^ of the Supreme Court of the 
United States, and then tried to smooth things over by calling Lincoln "an 
eminent lawyer" and a "kind-hearted, amiable, good-natured gentleman, 
with whom no man has a right to pick a quarrel," and to whom "there is no 
objection, except the monstrous revolutionary doctrines with which he is 
identified, and which he conscientiously entertains and is determined to 
carry out if he gets the power." Lincoln's reply presents the various difficul- 
ties which must be overcome by those who would defeat Senator Douglas's 
reelection, — an unfair legislative apportionment, a number of Douglas sup- 
porters chosen in 1856 and still holding seats in the new legislature, and 
finally the prominent place held by Douglas as his party's probable choice 
for the presidency in i860. Following this presentation of the inequality of 
the contest he restates his attitude toward the Dred Scott decision — not 



78 SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 

as a rule of law applicable to a single lawsuit, but as a rule of political conduct, 
indulges in a little friendly ridicule of the senator to keep his audience in 
good spirits, and concludes with a clear and convincing declaration of his 
contention regarding negro equality, that "in the right to put into his mouth 
the bread that his own hands have earned," the negro "is the equal of 
every other man, white or black." The description of Douglas's "round, 
jolly, fruitful face," bursting and sprouting with "post offices, land offices, 
marshalships, and cabinet appointments, chargeships and foreign missions," 
is a characteristic instance of Lincoln's lighter and more playful manner in 
debate. 

The challenge to Douglas to a series of joint public debates was sent by 
Lincoln just a week later, and its acceptance gave Lincoln the opportunity 
for which he so much wished of presenting his views on slavery to the Demo- 
cratic voters, 

. . . There is still another disadvantage under which we 
labor, and to which I will ask your attention. It arises 
out of the relative positions of the two persons who stand 
before the state as candidates for the Senate. Senator Doug- 
las is of world-wide renown. All the anxious politicians 
of his party, or who have been of his party for years past, 
have been looking upon him as certainly, at no distant day, 
to be the President of the United States. They have seen, 
in his round, jolly, fruitful face, post offices, land offices, 
marshalships, and cabinet appointments, chargeships and 
foreign missions, bursting and sprouting out in wonderful 
exuberance, ready to be laid hold of by their greedy hands. 
And as they have been gazing upon this attractive picture 
so long, they cannot, in the little distraction that has taken 
place in the party, bring themselves to give up the charming 
hope. But with greedier anxiety they rush about him, 
sustain him, and give him marches, triumphal entries, and 
receptions, beyond what, even in the days of his highest 
prosperity, they could have brought about in his favor. 

On the contrary, nobody has ever expected me to be 
President. In my poor, lean, lank face, nobody has ever 
seen that any cabbages were sprouting out. These are dis- 
advantages, all taken together, that the Republicans labor 
under. We have to fight this battle upon principle, and upon 



SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 79 

principle alone. I am in a certain sense made the standard- 
bearer in behalf of the Republicans. I was made so merely 
because there had to be some one so placed, I being in 
no wise preferable to any other one of the twenty-five, 
perhaps a hundred, we have in the Republican ranks. Then 
I say, I wish it to be distinctly understood and borne in 
mind, that we have to fight this battle without many — 
perhaps without any — of the external aids which are 
brought to bear against us. So I hope those with whom I 
am surrounded have principle enough to nerve themselves 
for the task, and leave nothing undone that can be fairly done 
to bring about the right result. . . . 

Now, as to the Dred Scott decision ; for upon that he 
makes his last point at me. He boldly takes ground in 
favor of that decision. This is one half the onslaught, and 
one third of the entire plan of the campaign. I am opposed 
to that decision in a certain sense, but not in the sense 
which he puts on it. I say that in so far as it decided in 
favor of Dred Scott's master, and against Dred Scott and his 
family, I do not propose to disturb or resist the decision. 
I never have proposed to do any such thing. I think that 
in respect for judicial authority my humble history would 
not suffer in comparison with that of Judge Douglas. He 
would have the citizen conform his vote to that decision; 
the member of Congress, his ; the President, his use of the 
veto power. He would make it a rule of political action 
for the people and all the departments of the government. 
I would not. By resisting it as a political rule, I disturb no 
right of property, create no disorder, excite no mobs. . . . 

One more thing. Last night Judge Douglas tormented 
himself with horrors about my disposition to make 
negroes perfectly equal with white men in social and polit- 
ical relations. He did not stop to show that I have said any 
such thing, or that it legitimately follows from anything I 
have said, but he rushes on with his assertions. I adhere to 
the Declaration of Independence. If Judge Douglas and his 



8o SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, 1858 

friends are not willing to stand by it, let them come up and 
amend it. Let them make it read that all men are created 
equal except negroes. Let us have it decided whether the 
Declaration of Independence, in this blessed year of 1858, 
shall be thus amended. In his construction of the Declara- 
tion last year, he said it only meant that Americans in 
America were equal to Englishmen in England. Then, 
when I pointed out to him that by that rule he excludes 
the Germans, the Irish, the Portuguese, and all the other 
people who have come amongst us since the Revolution, 
he reconstructs his construction. In his last speech he tells 
us it meant Europeans. 

I press him a little further, and ask if it meant to include 
the Russians in Asia .? or does it mean to exclude that 
vast population from the principles of our Declaration of 
Independence } I expect ere long he will introduce another 
amendment to his definition. He is not at all particular. 
He is satisfied with anything which does not endanger the 
nationalizing of negro slavery. It may draw white men 
down, but it must not lift negroes up. Who shall say, 
*'I am the superior and you are the inferior .^" 

My declarations upon this subject of negro slavery may 
be misrepresented, but cannot be misunderstood. I have 
caid that I do not understand the Declaration to mean that 
all men were created equal in all respects. They are not 
our equal in color; but I suppose that it does mean to declare 
that all men are equal in some respects ; they are equal in their 
right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Cer- 
tainly the negro is not our equal in color — perhaps not in 
many other respects ; still, in the right to put into his mouth 
the bread that his own hands have earned, he is the equal 
of every other man, white or black. In pointing out that 
more has been given you, you cannot be justified in taking 
away the little which has been given him. All I ask for the 
negro is that if you do not like him, let him alone. If God 
gave him but little, that little let him enjoy. 



QUINCY SPEECH 8 1 

When our government was established, we had the insti- 
tution of slavery among us. We were in a certain sense com- 
pelled to tolerate its existence. It was a sort of necessity. 
We had gone through our struggle, and secured our own 
independence. The fr^mers of the Constitution found the 
institution of slavery amongst their other institutions at the 
time. They found that by an effort to eradicate it, they 
might lose much of what they had already gained. They 
were obliged to bow to the necessity. They gave power to 
Congress to abolish the slave trade at the end of twenty 
years. They also prohibited slavery in the territories where 
it did not exist. They did what they could and yielded to 
necessity for the rest. I also yield to all which follows from 
that necessity. What I w^ould most desire would be the sep- 
aration of the white and black races 



FROM THE DEBATE WITH STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS; 
SPEECHES DELIVERED AT QUINCY, OCTOBER 13, 1858 

The Quincy debate was the sixth of the great series. Senator Douglas 
had accepted Lincoln's challenge, and a debate was held during the campaign, 
in each of the seven congressional districts in Illinois; namely, at Ottawa, 
Freeport, Jonesboro, Charleston, Galesburg, Quincy, and Alton. From the 
beginning, Douglas's prominence in national politics had drawn the attention 
of the entire country to the contest. As the series progressed and Lincoln 
demonstrated, much to the world's surprise, that he was Douglas's equal, the 
interest became intense. Lincoln was practically unknown outside of Illi- 
nois, while Douglas was the most conspicuous figure then in public life. 

A proper study of the discussion requires an understanding of the history 
of the time, and particularly of the political effect of the repeal of the Missouri 
Compromise and of the Dred Scott decision. The South had begun to 
believe that the constitutional rights of the slave states and the slave owners 
were in danger, and the North had awakened to the necessity of preventing 
the introduction of slavery into the national territories and the legalizing of 
slavery in the new states. 

The difficulties which Lincoln was confronting cannot be realized without 

reading Douglas's brilliant speeches, for the Democratic senator had no 

superior as a debater. He had gifts of oratory which Lincoln never possessed, 

an assurance that nothing could abash, a rich, resonant voice, great grace and 

LINCOLN — 6 



82 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

ease of expression, and a genius for debate which enabled him to take every 
advantage in pressing his argument, whether strictly legitimate or not. 
With these gifts Douglas had enormous personal popularity, and all the 
prestige of a lifelong series of personal and political successes. His fame 
as an orator was such that Lincoln's supporters dreaded the meeting; the 
most sanguine among them entertained little hope of their leader's success. 
Lincoln's deprecatory manner was not a pose. He realized that as compared 
with his distinguished opponent he was an obscure and an untried man. 

The Quincy debate is given here rather than one of the others because it 
shows best Lincoln's talent as a debater. There is here less of the dignity 
of the orator, it is true, and less literary distinction in the speaker's form of 
expression; but better than the others this debate makes it possible for the 
reader to realize the occasion, for it has much of Lincoln's characteristic wit 
and humor, and it contains many passages which prove Lincoln's readiness in 
repartee and retort. Thus, there is something winning in the opening 
sentence of his rejoinder: "Since Judge Douglas has said to you in his 
conclusion that he had not time in an hour and a half to answer all I had 
said in an hour, it follows, of course, that I will not be able to answer in 
half an hour all that he said in an hour and a half." There is no better illus- 
tration of Lincoln's humor in any of his formal speeches than when he 
charges Douglas with having diluted his Popular Sovereignty doctrine until 
it is "as thin as the homoeopathic soup that was made by boiling the shadow 
of a pigeon that had starved to death." 

It was after the Ottawa debate that Lincoln wrote to a friend : " Douglas 
and I, for the first time this canvass, crossed swords here yesterday; the 
fire flew some, and I am glad to know I am yet alive. There was a vast 
concourse of people — more than could get near enough to hear." 

The crowd at the Quincy meeting numbered from twelve to fifteen thou- 
sand, and included hundreds from Iowa and Missouri. 

The party feeling was so strong that it is not possible to learn the truth 
from the newspapers of the time as to the efi^ect of these speeches. The net 
result, however, was the election of Douglas to the United States Senate, 
the alienation of the southern wing of the Democratic party from Douglas, 
which until then had been friendly to him, and the conviction which grew 
from that time forward throughout the North that Abraham Lincoln had 
the qualities of leadership which made him the logical candidate of the Re- 
publican party for the presidency in i860. 

Lincoln's loss of the senatorship in this campaign was a disappointment, 
but it did not embitter him. "I am glad I made the late race," he wrote a 
friend. "It gave me a hearing on the great and durable question of the 
age, which I could have had in no other way; and though I now sink out of 
view and shall be forgotten, I believe I have made some marks which will 
tell for the cause of civil liberty long after I am gone." 



QUINCY SPEECH 83 

Ladies and Gentlemen : I have had no immediate con- 
ference with Judge Douglas, but I will venture to say that he 
and I will perfectly agree that your entire silence, both when 
I speak and when he speaks, will be most agreeable to us. 

In the month of May, 1856, the elements in the state of 
Illinois, which have since consolidated into the Repub- 
lican party, assembled together in a state convention at 
Bloomington. They adopted at that time what, in political 
language, is called a platform. In June of the same year the 
elements of the Republican party in the nation assembled 
together in a national convention at Philadelphia. They 
adopted what is called the national platform. In June, 
1858, — the present year, — the Republicans of Illinois 
reassembled at Springfield in state convention, and adopted 
again their platform, as I suppose not differing in any essen- 
tial particular from either of the former ones, but perhaps 
adding something in relation to the new developments of 
political progress in the country. 

The convention that assembled in June last did me the 
honor, if it be one, and I esteem it such, to nominate me as 
their candidate for the United States Senate. I have sup- 
posed that, in entering upon this canvass, I stood generally 
upon these platforms. We are now met together on the 13th 
of October of the same year, only four months from the 
adoption of the last platform, and I am unaware that in this 
canvass, from the beginning until to-day, any one of our 
adversaries has taken hold of our platforms, or laid his finger 
upon anything that he calls wrong in them. 

In the very first one of these joint discussions between 
Senator Douglas and myself, Senator Douglas, without 
alluding at all to these platforms, or any one of them, of 
which I have spoken, attempted to hold me responsible for a 
set of resolutions passed long before the meeting of either one 
of these conventions of which I have spoken. And as a 
ground for holding me responsible for these resolutions, he 
assumed that they had been passed at a state convention of 



84 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

the Republican party, and that I took part in that con- 
vention. It was discovered afterward that this was erro- 
neous, that the resolutions which he endeavored to hold me 
responsible for had not been passed by any state convention 
anywhere, — had not been passed at Springfield, where he 
supposed they had, or assumed that they had ; and that they 
had been passed in no convention in which I had taken 
part. 

The judge, nevertheless, was not willing to give up the 
point that he was endeavoring to make upon me, and he 
therefore thought to still hold me to the point that he was 
endeavoring to make, by showing that the resolutions that 
he read had been passed at a local convention in the northern 
part of the state, although it was not a local convention that 
embraced my residence at all, nor one that reached, as I 
suppose, nearer than one hundred and fifty or two hundred 
miles of where I was when it met, nor one in which I took any 
part at all. He also introduced other resolutions, passed 
at other meetings, and by combining the whole, although 
they were all antecedent to the two state conventions and the 
one national convention I have mentioned, still he insisted, 
and now insists, as I understand, that I am in some way 
responsible for them. 

At Jonesboro, on our third meeting, I insisted to the judge 
that I was in no way rightfully held responsible for the pro- 
ceedings of this local meeting or convention, in which I had 
taken no part, and in which I was in no way embraced ; 
but I insisted to him that if he thought I was responsible 
for every man or every set of men everywhere, who happen 
to be my friends, the rule ought to work both ways, and he 
ought to be responsible for the acts and resolutions of all men 
or sets of men who were or are now his supporters and 
friends ["Good, good"]; and gave him a pretty long string 
of resolutions, passed by men who are now his friends, and 
announcing doctrines for which he does not desire to be held 
responsible. 



QUINCY SPEECH 85 

This still does not satisfy Judge Douglas. He still adheres 
to his proposition, that I am responsible for what some of 
my friends in different parts of the state have done, but that 
he is not responsible for what his have done. At least, so 
I understand him. But in addition to that, the judge, at 
our meeting in Galesburg, last week, undertakes to establish 
that I am guilty of a species of double dealing with the pub- 
lic ; that I make speeches of a certain sort in the North, among 
the Abolitionists, which I would not make in the South, and 
that I make speeches of a certain sort in the South which I 
would not make in the North. I apprehend, in the course I 
have marked out for myself, that I shall not have to dwell 
at very great length upon this subject. 

As this was done in the judge's opening speech at Gales- 
burg, I had an opportunity, as I had the middle speech then, 
of saying something in answer to it. He brought forward a 
quotation or two from a speech of mine delivered at Chicago, 
and then, to contrast with it, he brought forward an extract 
from a speech of mine at Charleston, in which he insisted 
that I was greatly inconsistent, and insisted, that his conclu- 
sion followed, that I was playing a double part, and speak- 
ing in one region one way, and in another region another 
way. I have not time now to dwell on this as long as I would 
like, and wish only now to requote that portion of my speech 
at Charleston which the judge quoted, and then make some 
comments upon it. This he quotes from me as being deliv- 
ered at Charleston, and I believe correctly : — 

I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of 
bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the 
white and black races ; that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor 
of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to 
hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say, in 
addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the 
white and black races which will ever forbid the two races living 
together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch 
as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must 



86 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other 
man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the 
white race. ["Good, good," and loud cheers.] 

This, I believe, is the entire quotation from the Charleston 
speech, as Judge Douglas made it. His comments are as 
follows : — 

Yes, here you find men who hurrah for Lincoln, and say he is 
right when he discards all distinction between races, or when he 
declares that he discards the doctrine that there is such a thing as 
a superior and inferior race ; and Abolitionists are required and 
expected to vote for Mr, Lincoln because he goes for the equality 
of races, holding that in the Declaration of Independence the white 
man and negro were declared equal, and endowed by divine law 
with equality. And down South, the old-line Whigs, with the 
Kentuckians, the Virginians, and the Tennesseeans, he tells you 
that there is a physical difference between the races, making the 
one the superior, the other inferior, and he is in favor of maintain- 
ing the superiority of the white race over the negro. 

Those are the Judge's comments. Nov^, I Wish to show 
you that a month, or only lacking three days of a month, 
before I made the speech at Charleston, which the Judge 
quotes from, he had himself heard me say substantially the 
same thing. It was in our first meeting at Ottawa — and 
I will say a word about where it was, and the atmosphere 
it was in, after awhile — but at our first meeting, at Ottawa, 
I read an extract from an old speech of mine, made nearly 
four years ago, not merely to show my sentiments, but to 
show that my sentiments were long entertained and openly 
expressed ; in which extract I expressly declared that my own 
feelings would not admit a social and political equality be- 
tween the white and black races, and that even if my own feel- 
ings would admit of it, I still knew that the public sentiment 
of the country would not, and that such a thing was an utter 
impossibility, or substantially that. That extract from my 
old speech the reporters, by some sort of accident, passed 



QUINCY SPEECH 87 

over, and it was not reported. I lay no blame upon anybody. 
I suppose they thought that I would hand it over to them, 
and dropped reporting while I was reading it, but afterward 
went away without getting it from me. At the end of that 
quotation from my old speech, which I read at Ottawa, 
I made the comments which were reported at that time, and 
which I will now read, and ask you to notice how very 
nearly they are the same as Judge Douglas says were deliv- 
ered by me, down in Egypt. After reading, I added these 
words : — 

Now, gentlemen, I don't want to read at any greater length ; 
but this is the true complexion of all I have ever said in regard to 
the institution of slavery or the black race, and this is the whole 
of it : anything that argues me into his idea of perfect social and 
political equality with the negro, is but a specious and fantastical 
arrangement of words by which a man can prove a horse-chestnut 
to be a chestnut horse. I will say here, while upon the subject, 
that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the 
institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I 
have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. 
I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between 
the white and black races. There is a physical difference between 
the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their 
living together on the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch 
as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well 
as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having 
the superior position. [Cheers; "That's the doctrine."] I have 
never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstand- 
ing all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not 
entitled to all the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, — the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 
I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I 
agree with Judge Douglas that he is not my equal in many respects, 
certainly not in color, perhaps not in intellectual and moral endow- 
ments ; but in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of any- 
body else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal, and the equal 
of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man. 



88 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

I have chiefly introduced this for the purpose of meeting 
the judge's charge that the quotation he took from my 
Charleston speech was what I would say down South among 
the Kentuckians, the Virginians, etc., but would not say in 
the regions in which was supposed to be more of the Aboli- 
tion element. I now make this comment : That speech 
from which I have now read the quotation, and which is 
there given correctly — perhaps too much so for good taste 
— was made away up North in the Abolition district of this 
state par. excellence, in the Lovejoy district, — in the personal 
presence of Lovejoy, for he was on the stand with us when I 
made it. It had been made and put in print in that region 
only three days less than a month before the speech made 
at Charleston, the like of which Judge Douglas thinks I 
would not make where there was any abolition element. I 
only refer to this matter to say that I am altogether uncon- 
scious of having attempted any double-dealing anywhere, 
that upon one occasion I may say one thing, and leave other 
things unsaid, and vice versa; but that I have said anything 
on one occasion that is inconsistent with what I have said 
elsewhere, I deny, — at least I deny it so far as the intention 
is concerned. I find that I have devoted to this topic a 
larger portion of my time than I had intended. I wished 
to show, but I will pass it upon this occasion, that in the sen- 
timent I have occasionally advanced upon the Declaration 
of Independence, I am entirely borne out by the sentiments 
of our old Whig leader, Henry Clay, and I have the book 
here to show it from ; but because I have already occupied 
more time than I intended to do on that topic, I pass over it. 

At Galesburg I tried to show that by the Dred Scott deci- 
sion, pushed to its legitimate consequences, slavery would 
be established in all the states as well as in the territories. 
I did this because, upon a former occasion, I had asked 
Judge Douglas whether, if the Supreme Court should make 
a decision declaring that the states had not the power to 
exclude slavery from their limits, he would adopt and follow 



QUINCY SPEECH 89 

that decision as a rule of political action ; and because he had 
not directly answered that question, but had merely con- 
tented himself with sneering at it, I again introduced it, 
and tried to show that the conclusion that I stated followed 
inevitably and logically from the proposition already decided 
by the court. Judge Douglas had the privilege of replying 
to me at Galesburg, and again he gave me no direct answer 
as to whether he would or would not sustain such a decision 
if made. I give him his third chance to say yes or no. 
He is not obliged to do either, — probably he will not do 
either [Laughter] ; but I give him the third chance. I tried to 
show then that this result, this conclusion, inevitably fol- 
lowed from the point already decided by the court. The 
judge, in his reply, again sneers at the thought of the court 
making any such decision, and in the course of his remarks 
upon this subject uses the language which I will now read. 
Speaking of me, the judge says : "He goes on and insists 
that the Dred Scott decision would carry slavery into the 
free states, notwithstanding the decision itself says the con- 
trary." And he adds: "Mr. Lincoln knows that there is 
no member of the Supreme Court that holds that doctrine. 
He knows that every one of them in their opinions held the 
reverse." 

I especially introduce this subject again, for the purpose of 
saying that I have the Dred Scott decision here, and I will 
thank Judge Douglas to lay his finger upon the place in the 
entire opinions of the court where any one of them "says 
the contrary." It is very hard to affirm a negative with 
entire confidence. I say, however, that I have examined 
that decision with a good deal of care, as a lawyer examines 
a decision, and, so far as I have been able to do so, the court 
has nowhere in its opinions said that the states have the 
power to exclude slavery, nor have they used other language 
substantially that. I also say, so far as I can find, not one 
of the concurring judges has said that the states can exclude 
slavery, nor said anything that was substantially that. 



90 DEBATE fFITII DOUGLAS, 1858 

The nearest approach that any one of them has made to it, 
so far as I can find, was by Judge Nelson, and the approach 
he made to it was exactly, in substance, the Nebraska bill, — - 
that the states had the exclusive power over the question of 
slavery, so far as they are not limited by the Constitution of 
the United States. I asked the question, therefore, if the 
non-concurring judges, McLean or Curtis, had asked to get 
an express declaration that the states could absolutely exclude 
slavery from their limits, what reason have we to believe 
that it would not have been voted down by the majority of 
the judges, just as Chase's amendment^was voted down by 
Judge Douglas and his compeers when it was offered to the 
Nebraska bill. [Cheers.] 

Also, at Galesburg, I said something in regard to those 
Springfield resolutions that Judge Douglas had attempted 
to use upon me at Ottawa, and commented at some length 
upon the fact that they were, as presented, not genuine. 
Judge Douglas in his reply to me seemed to be somewhat 
exasperated. He said he never would have believed that 
Abraham Lincoln, as he kindly called me, would have 
attempted such a thing as I had attempted upon that occa- 
sion ; and among other expressions which he used toward 
me, was that I dared to say forgery, — that I had dared 
to say forgery [turning to Judge Douglas]. Yes, Judge, 
I did dare to say forgery. [Loud applause.] But in this 
political canvass, the judge ought to remember that I was 
not the first who dared to say forgery. At Jacksonville, 
Judge Douglas made a speech in answer to something said 
by Judge Trumbull, and at the close of what he said upon 
that subject, he dared to say that Trumbull had forged his 
evidence. He said, too, that he should not concern himself 
with Trumbull any more, but thereafter he should hold 
Lincoln responsible for the slanders upon him. [Laughter.] 
When I met him at Charleston after that, although I think 
that I should not have noticed the subject if he had not 
said he would hold me responsible for it, I spread out before 



QUINCY SPEECH 91 

him the statements of the evidence that Judge Trumbull 
had used, and I asked Judge Douglas, piece by piece to put 
his finger upon one piece of all that evidence that he would 
say was a forgery. When I went through with each and 
every piece, Judge Douglas did not dare then to say that any 
piece of it was forgery. [Laughter and cries of " Good, 
good."] So it seems that there are some things that Judge 
Douglas dares to do, and some that he dares not to do. 
[Great applause and laughter.] 

[A Voice : It's the same thing with you.] 

Yes, sir, it's the same thing with me. I do dare to say 
forgery when it's true, and don't dare to say forgery when it's 
false. [Thunders of applause. Cries of "Hit him again. 
Give it to him, Lincoln."] Now I will say here to this 
audience and to Judge Douglas, I have not dared to say he 
committed a forgery, and I never shall until I know it; 
but I did dare to say — just to suggest to the judge — 
that a forgery had been committed, which by his own show- 
ing had been traced to him and two of his friends. [Roars 
of laughter and loud cheers.] I dared to suggest to him 
that he had expressly promised in one of his public speeches 
to investigate that matter, and I dared to suggest to him 
that there was an implied promise that when he investigated 
it he would make known the result. I dared to suggest to 
the judge that he could not expect to be quite clear of sus- 
picion of that fraud, for since the time that promise was 
made he had been with those friends, and had not kept his 
promise in regard to the investigation and the report upon 
it. [Loud laughter. Cries of "Hit him hard"; "Good, 
good."] I am not a very daring man [Laughter], but I dared 
that much, Judge, and I am not much scared about it yet. 
[Uproarious laughter and applause.] 

When the judge says he wouldn't have believed of Abraham 
Lincoln that he would have made such an attempt as that, 
he reminds me of the fact that he entered upon this canvass 
with the purpose to treat me courteously. That touched me 



92 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

somewhat. [Great laughter.] It set me to thinking. I 
was aware, when it was first agreed that Judge Douglas 
and I were to have these seven joint discussions, that they 
were the successive acts of a drama, — perhaps I should say, 
to be enacted not merely in the face of audiences like this, 
but in the face of the nation, and to some extent, by my 
relation to him, and not from anything in myself, in the 
face of the world ; and I am anxious that they should be 
conducted with dignity and in the good temper which 
would be befitting the vast audience before which it was 
conducted. 

But when Judge Douglas got home from Washington 
and made his first speech in Chicago, the evening afterward 
I made some sort of a reply to it. His second speech was 
made at Bloomington, in which he commented upon my 
speech at Chicago, and said that I had used language in- 
geniously contrived to conceal my intentions, — or words 
to that effect. Now, I understand that this is an imputation 
upon my veracity and my candor. I do not know what the 
judge understood by it, but in our first discussion, at Ottawa, 
he led off by charging a bargain, somewhat corrupt in its 
character, upon Trumbull and myself, — that we had 
entered into a bargain, one of the terms of which was that 
Trumbull was to Abolitionize the old Democratic party, 
and I (Lincoln) was to Abolitionize the old Whig party ; 
I pretending to be as good an old-line Whig as ever. Judge 
Douglas may not understand that he implicated my truth- 
fulness and my honor when he said I was doing one thing 
and pretending another; and I misunderstood him if he 
thought he was treating me in a dignified way, as a man 
of honor and truth, as he now claims he was disposed to 
treat me. Even after that time, at Galesburg, when he 
brings forward an extract from a speech made at Chicago, 
and an extract from a speech made at Charleston, to prove 
that I was trying to play a double part, — that I was trying 
to cheat the public, and get votes upon one set of principles 



OUINCY SPEECH 93 

at one place, and upon another set of principles at another 
place, — I do not understand but what he impeaches my 
honor, my veracity, and my candor; and because he does 
this, I do not understand that I am bound, if I see a truth- 
ful ground for it, to keep my hands off of him. 

As soon as I learned that Judge Douglas was disposed to 
treat me in this way, I signified in one of my speeches that 
I should be driven to draw upon whatever of humble resources 
I might have, — to adopt a new course with him. I was 
not entirely sure that I should be able to hold my own 
with him, but I at least had the purpose made to do as well 
as I could upon him; and now I say that I will not be the 
first to cry "hold." I think it originated with the judge, 
and when he quits, I probably will. [Roars of laughter.] 
But I shall not ask any favors at all. 

He asks me, or he asks the audience, if I wish to push 
this matter to the point of personal difficulty. I tell him, 
no. He did not make a mistake, in one of his early speeches, 
when he called me an "amiable" man, though perhaps he 
did when he called me an "intelligent" man. [Laughter.] 
It really hurts me very much to suppose that I have wronged 
anybody on earth. I again tell him, no ! I very much 
prefer, when this canvass shall be over, however it may 
result, that we at least part without any bitter recollections 
of personal difficulties. 

The judge, in his concluding speech at Galesburg, says 
that I was pushing this matter to a personal difficulty, to 
avoid the responsibility for the enormity of my principles. 
I say to the judge and this audience, now, that I will again 
state our principles as well as I hastily can, in all their 
enormity, and if the judge hereafter chooses to confine 
himself to a war upon these principles, he will probably 
not find me departing from the same course. 

We have in this nation this element of domestic slavery. 
It is a matter of absolute certainty that it is a disturbing 
element. It is the opinion of all the great men who have 



94 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

expressed an opinion upon it, that it is a dangerous element. 
We keep up a controversy in regard to it. That controversy 
necessarily springs from difference of opinion ; and if we 
can learn exactly — can reduce to the lowest elements — 
what that difference of opinion is, we perhaps shall be better 
prepared for discussing the different systems of policy that 
we would propose in regard to that disturbing element. 
I suggest that the difference of opinion, reduced to its lowest 
terms, is no other than the difference between the men who 
think slavery a wrong, and those who do not think it wrong. 
The Republican party think it wrong; we think it is a moral, 
a social, and a political wrong. We think it is a wrong not 
confining itself merely to the persons or the states where it 
exists, but that it is a wrong in its tendency, to say the least, 
that extends itself to the existence of the whole nation. 
Because we think it wrong, we propose a course of policy 
that shall deal with it as a wrong. We deal with it as with 
any other wrong, in so far as we can prevent its growing 
any larger, and so deal with it that in the run of time there 
may be some promise of an end to it. 

We have a due regard to the actual presence of it amongst 
us, and the difficulties of getting rid of it in any satisfactory 
way, and all the constitutional obligations thrown about it. 
I suppose that in reference both to its actual existence in 
the nation, and to our constitutional obligations, we have 
no right at all to disturb it in the states where it exists, and 
we profess that we have no more inclination to disturb it 
than we have the right to do it. We go further than that; 
we don't propose to disturb it where, in one instance, we 
think the Constitution would permit us. We think the 
* Constitution would permit us to disturb it in the District 
of Columbia. Still, we do not propose to do that, unless 
it should be in terms which I don't suppose the nation is 
very likely soon to agree to, — the terms of making the eman- 
cipation gradual, and compensating the unwilling owners. 
Where we suppose we have the constitutional right, we 



QUINCY SPEECH 95 

restrain ourselves in reference to the actual existence of the 
institution and the difficulties thrown about it. We also 
oppose it as an evil so far as it seeks to spread itself. We 
insist on the policy that shall restrict it to its present limits. 
We don't suppose that in doing this we violate anything 
due to the actual presence of the institution, or anything 
due to the constitutional guarantees thrown around it. 

We oppose the Dred Scott decision in a certain way, upon 
which I ought perhaps to address you a few words. We do 
not propose that when Dred Scott has been decided to be a 
slave by that court, we, as a mob, will decide him to be 
free. We do not propose that, when any other one, or one 
thousand, shall be decided by the court to be slaves, we will 
in any violent way disturb the rights of property thus 
settled : but we nevertheless do oppose that decision as a 
political rule which shall be binding on the voter to vote for 
nobody who thinks it wrong : which shall be binding on the 
members of Congress or the President to favor no measure 
that does not actually concur with the principles of that 
decision. We do not propose to be bound by it as a political 
rule in that way because we think it lays the foundation, 
not merely of enlarging and spreading out what we consider 
an evil, but it lays the foundation for spreading that evil 
into the states themselves. We propose so resisting it as 
to have it reversed if we can, and a new judicial rule estab- 
lished upon this subject. 

I will add this, that if there be any man who does not 
believe that slavery is v/rong in the three aspects which I 
have mentioned, or in any one of them, that man is mis- 
placed, and ought to leave us. While, on the other hand, 
if there be any man in the Republican party who is impatient 
over the necessity springing from its actual presence, and is 
impatient of the constitutional guarantees thrown around it, 
and would act in disregard of these, he too is misplaced, 
standing with us. He will find his place somewhere else ; 
for we have a due regard, so far as we are capable of under- 



96 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

standing them, for all these things. This, gentlemen, as 
well as I can give it, is a plain statement of our principles 
in all their enormity. 

I will say now that there is a sentiment in the country 
contrary to me, — a sentiment which holds that slavery is 
not wrong, and therefore it goes for the policy that does 
not propose dealing with it as a wrong. That policy is the 
Democratic policy, and that sentiment is the Democratic 
sentiment. If there be a doubt in the mind of any one of 
this vast audience that this is really the central idea of the 
Democratic party, in relation to the subject, I ask him to 
bear with me while I state a few things tending, as I think, 
to prove that proposition. 

In the first place, the leading man -^ I think I may do 
my friend Judge Douglas the honor of calling him such — • 
advocating the present Democratic policy, never himself 
says it is wrong. He has the high distinction, so far as I 
know, of never having said slavery is either right or wrong. 
[Laughter.] Almost everybody else says one or the other, 
but the judge never does. If there be a man in the Demo- 
cratic party who thinks it is wrong, and yet clings to that 
party, I suggest to him, in the first place, that his leader 
don't talk as he does, for he never says that it is wrong. 

In the second place, I suggest to him that if he will examine 
the policy proposed to be carried forward, he will find that 
he carefully excludes the idea that there is anything wrong 
in it. If you will examine the arguments that are made on 
it, you will find that every one carefully excludes the idea 
that there is anything wrong in slavery. 

Perhaps that Democrat who says he is as much opposed 
to slavery as I am, will tell me that I am wrong about this. 
I wish him to examine his own course in regard to this matter 
a moment, and then see if his opinion will not be changed a 
little. You say it is wrong ; but don't you constantly object 
to anybody else saying so 1 Do you not constantly argue 
that this is not the right place to oppose it .? You say it 



QUINCY SPEECH 97 

must not be opposed in the free states, because slavery is 
not here; it must not be opposed in the slave states, because 
it is there; it must not be opposed in politics, because that 
will make a fuss ; it must not be opposed in the pulpit, 
because it is not religion. [Loud cheers.] Then where is 
the place to oppose it ^. There is no suitable place to oppose 
it. There is no plan in the country to oppose this evil 
overspreading the continent, which you say yourself is 
coming. Frank Blair and Gratz Brown tried to get up a 
system of gradual emancipation in Missouri, had an election 
in August, and got beat, and you, Mr. Democrat, threw up 
your hat, and hallooed " Hurrah for Democracy ! " [En- 
thusiastic cheers.] 

So I say, again, that in regard to the arguments that are 
made, when Judge Douglas says he "don't care whether 
slavery is voted up or voted down," whether he means that 
as an individual expression of sentiment, or only as a sort 
of statement of his views on national policy, it is alike true 
to say that he can thus argue logically if he don't see any- 
thing wrong in it ; but he cannot say so logically if he admits 
that slavery is wrong. He cannot say that he would as soon 
see a wrong voted up as voted dov/n. 

When Judge Douglas says that whoever or whatever 
community wants slaves, they have a right to have them, 
he is perfectly logical, if there is nothing wrong in the institu- 
tion ; but if you admit that it is wrong, he cannot logically 
say that anybody has a right to do wrong. When he says 
that slave property and horse and hog property are alike 
to be allowed to go into the territories, upon the principles 
of equality, he is reasoning truly, if there is no difference 
between them as property; but if the one is property held 
rightfully, and the other is wrong, then there is no equality 
between the right and wrong ; so that, turn it in any way you 
can, in all the arguments sustaining the Democratic policy, 
and in that policy itself, there is a careful, studied exclusion 
of the idea that there is anything wrong in slavery. 

LINCOLN — 7 



98 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

Let us understand this. I am not, just here, trying to 
prove that we are right, and they are wrong. I have been 
stating where we and they stand, and trying to show what is 
the real difference between us ; and I now say that when- 
ever we can get the question distinctly stated, can get all 
these men who believe that slavery is in some of these 
respects wrong, to stand and act with us in treating it as a 
wrong, — then, and not till then, I think we will in some way 
come to an end of this slavery agitation. [Prolonged 
cheers.] 

At this point Senator Douglas took the stand and spoke for an hour and 
a half in answer to Lincoln's foregoing speech. 



MR. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER AT QUINCY 

On resuming the stand, Mr. Lincoln was greeted with a tremendous 
cheer. He said : 

My Friends : Since Judge Douglas has said to you in 
his conclusion that he had not time in an hour and a half 
to answer all I had said in an hour, it follows of course that 
I will not be able to answer in half an hour all that he said 
in an hour and a half. [Cheers and laughter.] 

I wish to return to Judge Douglas my profound thanks 
for his public annunciation here to-day, to be put on record, 
that his system of policy in regard to the institution of 
slavery contemplates that it shall last forever. [Great cheers, 
and cries of " Hit him again."] We are getting a little nearer 
the true issue of this controversy, and I am profoundly 
grateful for this one sentence. Judge Douglas asks you, 
"Why cannot the institution of slavery, or rather, why 
cannot the nation, part slave and part free [Applause, and 
"That's so."], continue as our fathers made it, forever?" 
In the first place, I insist that our fathers did not make this 
nation half slave and half free, or part slave and part free. 
[Applause, and "That's so."] I insist that they found the 



REJOINDER AT QUINCY 99 

institution of slavery existing here. They did not make 
it so, but they left it so because they knew of no way 
to get rid of it at that time. ["Good, good." "That's 
true."] 

When Judge Douglas undertakes to say that, as a matter 
of choice, the fathers of the government made this nation 
part slave and part free, he assumes what is historically a 
falsehood. [Long continued applause.] More than that : 
when the fathers of the government cut off the source of 
slavery by the abolition of the slave trade, and adopted a 
system of restricting it from the new territories where it had 
not existed, I maintain that they placed it where they under- 
stood, and all sensible men understood, it was in the course 
of ultimate extinction ["That's so."]; and when Judge 
Douglas asks me why it cannot continue as our fathers made 
it, I ask him why he and his friends could not let it remain as 
our fathers made it ? [Tremendous cheering.] 

It is precisely all I ask of him in relation to the institution 
of slavery, that it shall be placed upon the basis that our 
fathers placed it upon. Mr. Brooks, of South Carolina, once 
said, and truly said, that when this government was estab- 
lished no one expected the institution of slavery to last until 
this day, and that the men who formed this government were 
wiser and better than the men of these days ; but the men of 
these days had experience which the fathers had not, 
and that experience had taught them the invention of the 
cotton gin, and this had made the perpetuation of the insti- 
tution of slavery a necessity in this country. Judge Douglas 
could not let it stand upon the basis where our fathers placed 
it, but removed it, and put it upon the cotton-gin basis. [Roars 
of laughter and enthusiastic applause.] It is a question, 
therefore, for him and his friends to answer, why they could 
not let it remain where the fathers of the government origi- 
nally placed it. [Cheers and cries of "Hurrah for Lincoln"; 
"Good"; "Good."] 

I hope nobody has understood me as trying to sustain the 



lOO DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

doctrine that we have a right to quarrel with Kentucky, 
or Virginia, or any of the slave states, about the institution 
of slavery, — thus giving the judge an opportunity to make 
himself eloquent and valiant against us in fighting for their 
rights. I expressly declared in my opening speech that I 
had neither the inclination to exercise, nor the belief in the 
existence of, the right to interfere with the states of Ken- 
tucky or Virginia in doing as they pleased with slavery or 
any other existing institution. [Loud applause.] Then 
what becomes of all his eloquence in behalf of the rights of 
the states, which are assailed by no living man ^ [Applause ; 
"He knows it's all humbuggery."] 

But I have to hurry on, for I have but a half hour. The 
judge has informed me, or informed this audience, that the 
Washington Union is laboring for my election to the United 
States Senate. [Cheers and laughter.] This is news to me, 
— not very ungrateful news either. [Turning to Mr. W. H. 
Carlin, who was on the stand] — I hope that Carlin will be 
elected to the state senate, and will vote for me. [Mr. 
Carlin shook his head.] Carlin don't fall in, I perceive, 
and I suppose he will not do much for me ; [Laughter] but I 
am glad of all the support I can get anywhere, if I can get 
it without practicing any deception to obtain it. In respect 
to this large portion of Judge Douglas's speech in which he 
tries to show that in the controversy between himself and 
the administration party he is in the right, I do not feel 
myself at all competent or inclined to answer him. I say 
to him, "Give it to them, [Laughter] — give it to them just 
all you can" ; [Renewed laughter and cheers] and, on the other 
hand, I say to Carlin, and Jake Davis, and to this man 
Wogley up here in Hancock, "Give it to Douglas [Roars 
of laughter], — just pour it into him." [Cheers and laughter; 
" Good for you " ; " Hurrah for Lincoln."] 

Now in regard to this matter of the Dred Scott decision, 
I wish to say a word or two. After all, the judge will not 
say whether, if a decision is made holding that the people 



REJOINDER AT QUINCY lOl 

of the states cannot exclude slavery, he will support it or not. 
He obstinately refuses to say what he will do in that case. 
The judges of the Supreme Court as obstinately refused to 
say what they would do on this subject. Before this I 
reminded him that at Galesburg he said the judges had 
expressly declared the contrary, and you remember that in 
my opening speech I told him I had the book containing that 
decision here, and I would thank him to lay his finger on the 
place where any such thing was said. He has occupied his 
hour and a half, and he has not ventured to try to sustain 
his assertion. [Loud cheers.] He never will. [Renewed 
cheers.] 

But he is desirous of knowing how we are going to reverse 
the Dred Scott decision. Judge Douglas ought to know how. 
Did not he and his political friends find a way to reverse the 
decision of that same court in favor of the constitutionality 
of the National Bank ? [Cheers and laughter.] Didn't 
they find a way to do it so effectually that they have reversed 
it as completely as any decision ever was reversed, so far as 
its practical operation is concerned ^. [Cheers, and cries of 
"Good"; "Good."] And let me ask you, didn't Judge 
Douglas find a way to reverse the decision of our Supreme 
Court v/hen it decided that Carlin's father — old Governor 
Carlin — had not the constitutional power to remove a 
Secretary of State .? [Great cheers and laughter.] Did he 
not appeal to the "mobs," as he calls them ? Did he not 
make speeches in the lobby to show how villainous that 
decision was, and how it ought to be overthrown ? Did he 
not succeed, too, in getting an act passed by the legislature 
to have it overthrown ? And didn't he himself sit down on 
that bench as one of the five added judges, who were to over- 
slaugh the four old ones, — getting his name of "judge" 
in that w^ay, and no other .? [Thundering cheers and laugh- 
ter.] If there is a villainy in using disrespect or making 
opposition to Supreme Court decisions, I commend it to 
Judge Douglas's earnest consideration. [Cheers and laugh- 



102 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

ter.] I know of no man in the state of Illinois who ought to 
know so well about hoiu much villainy it takes to oppose 
a decision of the Supreme Court as our honorable friend 
Stephen A. Douglas. [Long continued applause.] 



Let me talk to some gentleman down there among you 
who looks me in the face. We will say you are a member of 
the territorial legislature, and, like Judge Douglas, you 
believe that the right to take and hold slaves there is a con- 
stitutional right. The first thing you do is to swear you 
will support the Constitution and all rights guaranteed 
therein ; that you will, whenever your neighbor needs your 
legislation to support his constitutional rights, not withhold 
that legislation. If you withhold that necessary legisla- 
tion for the support of the Constitution and constitutional 
rights, do you not commit perjury ? [Cries of "Yes."] 
I ask every sensible man if that is not so ? ["Yes" ; "Yes" ; 
"That's a fact."] That is undoubtedly just so, say what 
you please. Now, that is precisely what Judge Douglas 
says, that this is a constitutional right. Does the judge 
mean to say that the territorial legislature in legislating may, 
by withholding necessary laws, or by passing unfriendly 
laws, nullify that constitutional right ? Does he mean to say 
that } Does he mean to ignore the proposition so long and 
well established in law, that what you cannot do directly, 
you cannot do indirectly } Does he mean that ? 

The truth about the matter is this : Judge Douglas has 
sung paeans to his "popular sovereignty" doctrine until 
his Supreme Court, cooperating with him, has squatted his 
squatter sovereignty out. [Uproarious laughter and ap- 
plause.] But he will keep up this species of humbuggery 
about squatter sovereignty. He has at last invented this 
sort of do-nothing sovereignty, [Renewed laughter] — that 
the people may exclude slavery by a sort of "sovereignty" 
that is exercised by doing nothing at all. [Continued 



REJOINDER AT QUINCY 103 

laughter.] Is not that running his popular sovereignty 
down awfully ? [Laughter.] Has it not got down as thin 
as the homoeopathic soup that was made by boiling the 
shadow of a pigeon that had starved to death .f* [Roars 
of laughter and cheering.] But at last when it is brought to 
the test of close reasoning, there is not even that thin decoc- 
tion of it left. It is a presumption impossible in the domain 
of thought. It is precisely no other than the putting of that 
most unphilosophical proposition, that two bodies can 
occupy the same space at the same time. The Dred Scott 
decision covers the whole ground, and while it occupies it, 
there is no room even for the shadow of a starved pigeon to 
occupy the same ground. [Loud cheers and laughter. A 
voice on the platform — ''Your time is almost out." Loud 
cries of "Go on, go on " ; "We'll listen all day."] 

When I sometimes, in relation to the organization of new 
societies in new countries, where the soil is clean and clear, 
insist that we should keep that principle in view, Judge 
Douglas will have it that I want a negro wife. [Great 
laughter.] He never can be brought to understand that there 
is any middle ground on this subject. I have lived until 
my fiftieth year, and have never had a negro woman either 
for a slave or a wife, and I think I can live fifty centuries, 
for that matter, without having had one for either. [Cheers 
and laughter.] I maintain that you may take Judge Doug- 
las's quotations from my Chicago speech, and from my 
Charleston speech, and the Galesburg speech, — in his 
speech of to-day, — and compare them over, and I am 
willing to trust them with you upon his proposition that 
they show rascality or double-dealing. I deny that they 
do. [Great applause.] 

I am told that I still have five minutes left. There is 
another matter I wish to call attention to. He says, when 



104 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

he discovered there was a mistake in that case, he came 
forward magnanimously, without my calHng his attention 
to it, and explained it. I will tell you how he became so 
magnanimous. When the newspapers of our side had dis- 
covered and published it, and put it beyond his power to 
deny it, then he came forward and made a virtue of ne- 
cessity by acknowledging it. [Great applause.] Now he 
argues that all the point there was in those resolutions, 
although never passed at Springfield, is retained by their 
being passed at other localities. Is that true .? He said 
I had a hand in passing them, in his opening speech, — that 
I was in the convention and helped to pass them. Do the 
resolutions touch me at all .? It strikes me there is some 
difference between holding a man responsible for an act which 
he has not done and holding him responsible for an act that 
he has done. Yqu will judge whether there is any difference 
in the "spots." [Laughter and cheers.] And he has taken 
credit for great magnanimity in coming forward and acknowl- 
edging what is proved on him beyond even the capacity of 
Judge Douglas to deny; and he has more capacity in that 
way than any other living man. [Laughter and cheers.] 

Then he wants to know why I won't withdraw the charge 
in regard to a conspiracy to make slavery national, as he 
has withdrawn the one he made. May it please his worship, 
I will withdraw it zuhen it is proven false on me as that was 
proven false on him. [Shouts of applause and laughter.] 
I will add a little more than that. I will withdraw it when- 
ever a reasonable man shall be brought to believe that the 
charge is not true. [Renewed applause.] 

I have asked Judge Douglas's attention to certain matters 
of fact tending to prove the charge of a conspiracy to nation- 
alize slavery, and he S3.ys he convinces me that this is all 
untrue because Buchanan was not in the country at that 
time, and because the Dred Scott case had not then got into 
the Supreme Court ; and he says that I say the Democratic 
owners of Dred Scott got up the case. I never did say that. 



ALTON SPEECH ' . 1 05 

[Applause.] I defy Judge Douglas to show that I ever said 
so, for I never uttered it. [One of Mr Douglas's reporters 
gesticulated affirmatively at Mr. Lincoln.] I don't care if 
your hireling does say I did, I tell you myself that / never 
said the ^'Democratic*' owners of Dred Scott got up the case. 
[Tremendous enthusiasm.] I have never pretended to know 
whether Dred Scott's owners were Democrats, or Aboli- 
tionists, or Free-soilers, or Border Ruffians. I have said 
that there is evidence about the case tending to show that it 
was a made-up case, for the purpose of getting that decision. 
I have said that that evidence was very strong in the fact 
that when Dred Scott was declared to be a slave, the owner 
of him made him free, showing that he had had the case 
tried and the question settled for such use as could be made 
of that decision ; he cared nothing about the property thus 
declared to be his by that decision. [Enthusiastic applause.] 
But my time is out and I can say no more. 



FROM THE SPEECH AT ALTON, ON OCTOBER 15, 1858; THE 
LAST OF THE FORMAL DEBATES WITH DOUGLAS 

The real issue between the two senatorial candidates in these debates 
is put in Lincoln's direct style near the conclusion of the Alton speech: 
"That is the real issue. That is the issue that will continue in this country 
when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It 
is the eternal struggle between these two principles — right and wrong — 
throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to 
face from the beginning of time." 

. . . On this subject of treating it as a wrong and limiting 
its spread, let me say a word. Has anything ever threat- 
ened the existence of this Union save and except this very 
institution of slavery .? What is it that we hold most dear 
amongst us .? Our own liberty and prosperity. What has 
ever threatened our liberty and prosperity save and except 
this institution of slavery '^. If this is true, how do you pro- 
pose to improve the condition of things by enlarging slavery, 



Io6 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

— by spreading it out and making it bigger ? You may have 
a wen or a cancer upon your person, and not be able to cut 
it out lest you bleed to death ; but surely it is no way to cure 
it, to engraft it and spread it over your whole body. That 
is no proper way of treating what you regard a wrong. 
You see this peaceful way of dealing with it as a wrong, 
restricting the spread of it, and not allowing it to go into new 
countries where it has not already existed. That is the 
peaceful way, the old-fashioned way, the way in which 
the fathers themselves set us the example. 

On the other hand, I have said there is a sentiment which 
treats it as not being wrong. That is the Democratic senti- 
ment of this day. I do not mean to say that every man who 
stands within that range positively asserts that it is right. 
That class will include all who positively assert that it is 
right, and all who, like Judge Douglas, treat it as indifferent, 
and do not say it is either right or wrong. These two classes 
of men fall within the general class of those who do not look 
upon it as a wrong. And if there be among you anybody 
who supposes that he, as a Democrat, can consider himself 
*'as much opposed to slavery as anybody," I would like to 
reason with him. You never treat it as a wrong. What 
other thing that you consider a wrong do you deal with as you 
deal with that .? Perhaps you say it is wrong, but your leader 
never does, and you quarrel with anybody who says it is 
wrong. Although you pretend to say so yourself, you can 
find no fit place to deal with it as a wrong. You must not 
say anything about it in the free states, because it is not 
here. You must not say anything about it in the slave 
states, because it is there. You must not say anything 
about it in the pulpit, because that is religion, and has 
nothing to do with it. You must not say anything about it 
in politics, because that will disturb the security of "my 
place." There is no place to talk about it as being a wrong, 
although you say yourself it is wrong. But, finally, you 
will screw yourself up to the belief that if the people of the 



ALTON SPEECH 1 07 

slave states should adopt a system of gradual emancipation 
on the slavery question, you would be in favor of it. You 
would be in favor of it ! You say that is getting it in the 
right place, and you would be glad to see it succeed. But 
you are deceiving yourself. You all know that Frank 
Blair and Gratz Brown, down there in St. Louis, undertook 
to introduce that system in Missouri. They fought as 
valiantly as they could for the system of gradual emancipa- 
tion, which you pretend you would be glad to see succeed. 
Now, I will bring you to the test. After a hard fight they were 
beaten ; and when the news came over here, you threw up 
your hats and hurrahed for Democracy ! More than that, 
take all the argument made in favor of the system you have 
proposed, and it carefully excludes the idea that there is 
anything wrong in the institution of slavery. The argu- 
ments to sustain that policy carefully exclude it. Even 
here to-day, you heard Judge Douglas quarrel with me, 
because I uttered a wish that it might sometime come to an 
end. Although Henry Clay could say he wished every slave 
in the United States was in the country of his ancestors, 
I am denounced by those pretending to respect Henry 
Clay, for uttering a wish that it might sometime, in some 
peaceful way, come to an end. 

The Democratic policy in regard to that institution will 
not tolerate the merest breath, the slightest hint, of the 
least degree of wrong about it. Try it by some of Judge 
Douglas's arguments. He says he ''don't care whether it is 
voted up or voted down in the territories." I do not care 
myself in dealing with that expression whether it is intended 
to be expressive of his individual sentiments on the subject 
or only of the national policy he desires to have established. 

It is alike valuable for my purpose. Any man can say 
that who does not see anything wrong in slavery, but no 
man can logically say it who does see a wrong in it, because 
no man can logically say he don't care whether a wrong is 
voted up or voted down. He may say he don't care whether 



lo8 DEBATE WITH DOUGLAS, 1858 

an indifferent thing is voted up or down, but he must logi- 
cally have a choice between a right thing and a wrong thing. 
He contends that whatever community wants slaves has a 
right to have them. So they have if it is not a wrong. But 
if it is a wrong, he cannot say people have a right to do 
wrong. He says that, upon the score of equality, slaves 
should be allowed to go into a new territory like other prop- 
erty. This is strictly logical if there is no difference between 
it and other property. If it and other property are equal, « 
his argument is entirely logical. But if you insist that one is 
wrong and the other right, there is no use to institute a com- 
parison between right and wrong. You may turn over 
everything in the Democratic policy from beginning to end, j 
whether in the shape it takes on the statute book, in the shape 
it takes in the Dred Scott decision, in the shape it takes in 
conversation, or the shape it takes in short maxim-like 
arguments, it everywhere carefully excludes the idea that 
there is anything wrong in it. 

That is the real issue. That is the issue that will con- 
tinue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge 
Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle 
between these two principles — right and wrong — through- 
out the world. They are the two principles that have stood 
face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue 
to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity, and 
the other the "divine right of kings." It is the same prin- 
ciple in whatever shape it develops itself. It is the same 
spirit that says, "You work and toil and earn bread, and I'll 
eat it." No matter in what shape it comes, whether from the 
mouth of a king, who seeks to bestride the people of his own 
nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race 
of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the 
same tyrannical principle. . . . Whenever the issue can be 
distinctly made, and all extraneous matter thrown out, so . 
that men can fairly see the real difference between the par- 
ties, this controversy will soon be settled, and it will be done 



LETTER TO J. T. THORNTON, 1858 109 

peaceably, too. There will be no war, no violence. It will 
be placed again where the wisest and best men of the world 
placed it. 



LETTER TO JAMES T. THORNTON 

James T. Thornton was in politics, serving later through three sessions 
of the legislature as representative from Putnam County. Lincoln's ab- 
sences were due to the fact that he had a large trial practice and was trying 
cases in every part of Illinois and in other states. The significant phrase 
in the letter is " still keep reading." See letter to Isham Reavis (p. 64) ; 
also memorandum for Law Lecture (p. 50). 

Springfield, December 2, 1858. 

Dear Sir : Yours of the 29th written in behalf of Mr. 
John H. Widner, is received. I am absent altogether too 
much to be a suitable instructor for a law student. When 
a man has reached the age that Mr. Widner has, and has 
already been doing for himself, m_y judgment is, that he reads 
the books for himself without an instructor. That is pre- 
cisely the way I came to the law. Let Mr. Widner read 
Blackstone's Commentaries, Chitty's Pleadings, GreenleaPs 
Evidence, Story's Equity, and Story's Equity Pleadings, get 
a license, and go to the practice, and still keep reading. 
That is my judgment of the cheapest, quickest, and best 
way for Mr. Widner to make a lawyer of himself. 

Yours truly, 
A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO THOMAS JOHNSON PICKETT 

The campaign of 1858 had interrupted Lincoln's law practice, had caused 
him heavy expense, and had left him poor. He tried to earn something by 
delivering an occasional lecture, but his unwillingness to make any ade- 
quate charge for his lectures deprived him of any substantial income from 
that source. It was proof of the honesty which the world was already 



no LETTER TO THOMAS J. PICKETT, 1859 

recognizing a-s his strongest trait, that less than thirteen months before his 
nomination he should be able to say "I do not think myself fit for the presi- 
dency." 

Mr. Pickett was one of the first editors to propose Lincoln in the public 
press for president. He was a member of the anti-Nebraska editorial con- 
vention of 1856, which organized the Republican party in Illinois, and of the 
first Republican state committee. At the time this letter was written he 
was editing a paper at Rock Island, and was already urging Lincoln to be- 
come a candidate. He represented Putnam County in the state senate in 
1861 and 1863. 

Springfield, April 16, 1859. 

My dear Sir: Yours of the 13th is just received. My 
engagements are such that I cannot at any very early day 
visit Rock Island to deliver a lecture, or for any other object. 
As to the other matter you kindly mention, I must in candor 
say I do not think myself fit for the presidency. I certainly 
am flattered and gratified that some partial friends think of 
me in that connection ; but I really think it best for our 
cause that no concerted effort, such as you suggest, should be 
made. Let this be considered confidential. 

Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY WRITTEN FOR JESSE W. FELL 

December 20, 1859 

I was born February 12,1 809, in Hardin County, Kentucky. 
My parents were both born in Virginia, of undistinguished 
families — second families, perhaps I should say. My 
mother, who died in my tenth year, was of a family of the 
name of Hanks, some of whom now reside in Adams, and 
others in Macon County, Illinois. My paternal grandfather, 
Abraham Lincoln, emigrated from Rockingham County, 
Virginia, to Kentucky about 1781 or 1782, where a year or 
two later he was killed by the Indians, not in battle, but by 
stealth, when he was laboring to open a farm in the forest. 



AUTOBIOGRAPHY, 1859 III 

His ancestors, who were Quakers, went to Virginia from Berks 
County, Pennsylvania. An effort to identify them with the 
New England family of the same name ended in nothing 
more definite than a similarity of Christian names in both 
families, such as Enoch, Levi, Mordecai, Solomon, Abraham, 
and the like. 

My father, at the death of his father, was but six years 
of age, and he grew up literally without education. He 
removed from Kentucky to what is now Spencer County, 
Indiana, in my eighth year. We reached our new home 
about the time the state came into the Union. It was a 
wild region, with many bears and other wild animals still in 
the woods. There I grew up. There were some schools, 
so called, but no qualification was ever required of a teacher 
beyond "readin', writin', and cipherin'" to the rule of three. 
If a straggler supposed to understand Latin happened to 
sojourn in the neighborhood, he was looked upon as a 
wizard. There was absolutely nothing to excite ambition 
for education. Of course, when I came of age I did not 
know much. Still, somehow, I could read, write, and cipher 
to the rule of three, .but that was all. I have not been to 
school since. The little advance I now have upon this store 
of education I have picked up from time to time under the 
pressure of necessity. 

I was raised to farm work, which I continued till I was 
twenty-two. At twenty-one I came to Illinois, Macon 
County. Then I got to New Salem, at that time in Sanga- 
mon, now in Menard, County, where I remained a year as a 
sort of clerk in a store. 

Then came the Black Hawk war, and I was elected a 
captain of volunteers, a success which gave me more pleasure 
than any I have had since. I went the campaign, was elated, 
ran for the legislature the same year (1832), and was beaten 
— the only time I ever have been beaten by the people. 
The next and three succeeding biennial elections I was elected 
to the legislature. I was not a candidate afterward. During 



112 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

this legislative period I had studied law, and removed to 
Springfield to practice it. In 1846 I was once elected to the 
lower House of Congress. Was not a candidate for reelection. 
From 1849 to 1854, both inclusive, practiced law more 
assiduously than ever before. Always a Whig in politics; 
and generally on the Whig electoral tickets, making active 
canvasses. I was losing interest in politics when the repeal 
of the Missouri Compromise aroused me again. What I 
have done since then is pretty well known. 

If any personal description of me is thought desirable, 
it may be said I am, in height, six feet four inches, nearly; 
lean in flesh, weighing on an average one hundred and eighty 
pounds ; dark complexion, with coarse black hair and gray 
eyes. No other marks or brands recollected. 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, FEBRUARY 27, i860 

This speech was in response to an invitation to deliver a lecture in New 
York. Realizing that he had not been successful as a lecturer, Lincoln 
was loath to accept, but finally consented on the condition that he be 
permitted to discuss the political situation. It was a great opportunity. 
Among the members of the Young Men's Republican Union which had the 
enterprise in charge were such men as William Cullen Bryant, Horace Greeley, 
and David Dudley Field. The audience, a vast one, included the most 
cultivated and intelligent men and women of the East. The address was 
a distinct success. The Tribune next morning said of it: "No man ever 
before made such an impression on his first appeal to a New York audience." 

It was this address which constituted Lincoln's real introduction to 
the Republicans of the East and made it possible a few months later to 
secure their consent to his nomination to the presidency. As the Gettys- 
burg oration is the most perfect work of Lincoln the orator, and the second 
inaugural is the most perfect work of Lincoln the prophet and the poet, the 
Cooper Institute speech is the best work of Lincoln the reasoner and scholar. 

The logic of the address is conclusive. He undertakes to prove that the 
men who framed the Constitution of the United States believed that human 
slavery was wrong and that the national government had power to exclude 
it from the national territory, and he proves it. In doing so he produces 
evidence of research which only a profound student of American constitu- 
tional history could have made. Besides furnishing out of a well-stored 
mind the proof of a lifelong study of a great public question, and besides ex- 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 II3 

hibiting a literary style and oratorical quality of a high order, he shows reason- 
ing powers unsurpassed in the American forum. The climax of tKe speech 
is in the final sentence, one of Lincoln's best: "Let us have faith that right 
makes might, and in that faith, let us to the end dare to do our duty as we 
understand it." 

The speech was published by the Young Men's Republican Union as a 
campaign document, with an introduction from which we quote. "No one 
who has not actually attempted to verify its details can understand the 
patient research and historical labor which it embodies. The history of 
our earlier politics is scattered through numerous journals, statutes, pam- 
phlets, and letters; and these are defective in completeness and accuracy 
of statement, and in indices and tables of contents. Neither can any one 
who has not traveled over this precise ground appreciate the accuracy of 
every trivial detail, or the self-denying impartiality with which Mr. Lincoln 
has turned from the testimony of 'the fathers' on the general question of 
slavery to present the single question which he discusses. From the first 
line to the last — from his premises to his conclusion, he travels with a 
swift, unerring directness which no logician ever excelled — an argument 
complete and full, without the affectation of learning, and without the 
stifl^ness which usually accompanies dates and details. A single, easy, 
simple sentence of plain Anglo-Saxon words contains a chapter of history, 
that, in some instances, has taken days of labor to verify and which must 
have cost the author months of investigation to acquire." 

Joseph H. Choate has thus described his impressions of this occasion: 
"At first sight there was nothing impressive or imposing about him — ex- 
cept that his great stature singled him out from the crowd ; his clothes hung 
awkwardly on his giant frame; his face was of a dark pallor, without the 
slightest tinge of color; his seamed and rugged features bore the furrows 
of hardship and struggle; his deep-set eyes looked sad and anxious. . . . 
He was equal to the occasion. When he spoke he was transformed; his 
eye kindled, his voice rang, his face shone and seemed to light up the whole 
assembly. For an hour and a half he held his audience in the hollow of his 
hand. His style of speech and manner of delivery were severely simple." 

Mr. President and Fellow Citizens of New York: 
The facts with which I shall deal this evening are mainly 
old and familiar; nor is there anything new in the general 
use I shall make of them. If there shall be any novelty, 
it will be in the mode of presenting the facts, and the infer- 
ences and observations following that presentation. In his 
speech last autumn at Columbus, Ohio, as reported in the 
New York Times, Senator Douglas said : 

LINCOLN — 8 



114 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

Our fathers, when they framed the government under which we live, 
understood this question just as well, and even better, than we do now. 

I fully indorse this, and I adopt it as a text for this dis- 
course. I so adopt it because it furnishes a precise and an 
agreed starting point for a discussion between Republicans 
and that wing of the Democracy headed by Senator Douglas. 
It simply leaves the inquiry : What was the understanding 
those fathers had of the question mentioned ^ 

What is the frame of government under which we live ^. 
The answer must be, "The Constitution of the United 
States." That Constitution consists of the original, framed 
in 1787, and under which the present government first went 
into operation, and twelve subsequently framed amendments, 
the first ten of which were framed in 1789. 

Who were our fathers that framed the Constitution ? I 
suppose the "thirty-nine" who signed the original instru- 
ment may be fairly called our fathers who framed that part 
of the present government. It is almost exactly true to say 
they framed it, and it is altogether true to say they fairly 
represented the opinion and sentiment of the whole nation 
at that time. Their names, being familiar to nearly all, 
and accessible to quite all, need not now be repeated. 

I take these "thirty-nine," for the present, as being "our 
fathers who framed the government under which we live." 
What is the question which, according to the text, those 
fathers understood "just as w^ell, and even better, than we 
do now ?" 

It is this : Does the proper division of local from federal 
authority, or anything in the Constitution, forbid our federal 
government to control as to slavery in our federal territories ? 

Upon this. Senator Douglas holds the affirmative, and 
Republicans the negative. This affirmation and denial form 
an issue ; and this issue — this question — is precisely what 
the text declares our fathers understood " better than we." 
Let us now inquire whether the "thirty-nine," or any of 
them, ever acted upon this question ; and if they did, how 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 15 

they acted upon it — how they expressed that better under- 
standing. In 1784, three years before the Constitution, the 
United States then owning the Northwestern Territory, and 
no other, the Congress of the Confederation had before them 
the question of prohibiting slavery in that territory; and 
four of the "thirty-nine" who afterward framed the Con- 
stitution were in that Congress and voted on that question. 
Of these, Roger Sherman, Thomas Mifflin, and Hugh 
WilHamson voted for the prohibition, thus showing that, in 
their understanding, no Hne dividing local from federal 
authority, nor anything else, properly forbade the federal 
government to control as to slavery in federal territory. 
The other of the four, James McHenry, voted against the 
prohibition, showing that for some cause he thought it im- 
proper to vote for it. 

In 1787, still before the Constitution, but while the con- 
vention was in session framing it, and while the Northwestern 
Territory still was the only territory owned by the United 
States, the same question of _ prohibiting slavery in the 
territory again came before the Congress of the Confedera- 
tion ; and two more of the "thirty-nine" who afterward 
signed the Constitution were in that Congress, and voted on 
the question. They were William Blount and William Few; 
and they both voted for the prohibition — thus showing 
that in their understanding no line dividing local from federal 
authorit}^, nor anything else, properly forbade the federal 
government to control as to slavery in federal territory. 
This time the prohibition became a law, being part of what is 
now well known as the ordinance of '87. 

The question of federal control of slavery in the territories 
seems not to have been directly before the convention which 
framed the original Constitution ; and hence it is not re- 
corded that the "thirty-nine," or any of them, while engaged 
on that instrument, expressed any opinion on that precise 
question. 

In 1789, by the first Congress which sat under the Con- 



Il6 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

stitution, an act was passed to enforce the ordinance of '87, 
including the prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern 
Territory. The bill for this act was reported by one of the 
"thirty-nine" — Thomas Fitzsimmons, then a member of 
the House of Representatives from Pennsylvania. It went 
through all its stages without a word of opposition, and 
finally passed both branches without ayes and nays, which is 
equivalent to a unanimous passage. In this Congress there 
were sixteen of the thirty-nine fathers who framed the 
original Constitution. They were John Langdon, Nicholas 
Oilman, Wm. S. Johnson, Roger Sherman, Robert Morris, 
Thos. Fitzsimmons, William Few, Abraham Baldwin, Rufus 
King, William Paterson, George Clymer, Richard Bassett, 
George Read, Pierce Butler, Daniel Carroll, and James 
Madison. 

This shows that, in their understanding, no line dividing 
local from federal authority, nor anything in the Constitution, 
properly forbade Congress to prohibit slavery in the federal 
territory ; else both their fidelity to correct principle, and 
their oath to support the Constitution, would have con- 
strained them to oppose the prohibition. 

Again, George Washington, another of the '* thirty-nine," 
was then President of the United States and as such approved 
and signed the bill, thus completing its validity as a law, and 
thus showing that, in his understanding, no line dividing 
local from federalauthority, nor anything in the Constitution, 
forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in 
federal territory. 

No great while after the adoption of the original Constitu- 
tion, North Carolina ceded to the federal government the 
country now constituting the state of Tennessee ; and a few 
years later Georgia ceded that which now constitutes the 
states of Mississippi and Alabama. In both deeds of cession 
it was made a condition by the ceding states that the federal 
government should not prohibit slavery in the ceded country. 
Besides this, slavery was then actually in the ceded country. 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 117 

Under these circumstances, Congress, on taking charge of 
these countries, did not absolutely prohibit slavery within 
them. But they did interfere with it — take control of it 

— even there, to a certain extent. In 1798 Congress 
organized the territory of Mississippi. In the act of organiza- . 
tion they prohibited the bringing of slaves into the territory 
from any place without the United States, by fine, and giving 
freedom to slaves so bought. This act passed both branches 
of Congress without yeas and nays. In that Congress were 
three of the "thirty-nine" who framed the original Con- 
stitution. They were John Langdon, George Read, and 
Abraham Baldwin. They all probably voted for it. Cer- 
tainly they would have placed their opposition to it upon 
record if, in their understanding, any line dividing local from 
federal authority, or anything in the Constitution, properly 
forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in 
federal territory. 

In 1803 the federal government purchased the Louisiana 
country. Our former territorial acquisitions came from 
certain of our own states; but this Louisiana country was 
acquired from a foreign nation. In 1804 Congress gave a 
territorial organization to that part of it which now con- 
stitutes the state of Louisiana. New Orleans, lying within 
that part, was an old and comparatively large city. There 
were other considerable towns and settlements, and slavery 
was extensively and thoroughly intermingled with the 
people. Congress did not, in the Territorial Act, prohibit 
slavery ; but they did interfere with it — take control of it 

— in a more marked and extensive way than they did in the 
case of Mississippi. The substance of the provision therein 
made in relation to slaves was : 

1st. That no slave should be imported into the territory 
from foreign parts. 

2d. That no slave should be carried into it who had been 
imported into the United States since the first day of May, 
1798. 



Il8 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

3d. That no slave should be carried into it, except by the 
owner, and for his own use as a settler; the penalty in all the 
cases being a fine upon the violator of the law, and freedom ; 
to the slave. 

This act also was passed without ayes or nays. In the 
Congress which passed it there were two of the "thirty-nine." 
They were Abraham Baldwin and Jonathan Dayton. As 
stated in the case of Mississippi, it is probable they both 
voted for it. They would not have allowed it to pass without 
recording their opposition to it if, in their understanding, it 
violated either the line properly dividing local from federal 
authority, or any provision of the Constitution. 

In 1819-1820 came and passed the Missouri question. 
Many votes were taken, by yeas and nays, in both branches 
of Congress, upon the various phases of the general question. 
Two of the "thirty-nine" — Rufus King and Charles 
Pinckney — were members of that Congress. Mr. King 
steadily voted for slavery prohibition and against all com- 
promises, while Mr. Pinckney as steadily voted against 
slavery prohibition and against all compromises. By this, 
Mr. King showed that, in his understanding, no line dividing 
local from federal authority, nor anything in the Constitu- 
tion, was violated by Congress prohibiting slavery in federal 
territory; while Mr. Pinckney, by his votes, showed that, 
in his understanding, there was some sufficient reason for 
opposing such prohibition in that case. 

The cases I have mentioned are the only acts of the "thirty- 
nine," or of any of them, upon the direct issue, which I have 
been able to discover. * 

To enumerate the persons who thus acted as being four in 
1784, two in 1787, seventeen in 1789, three in 1798, two in 
1804, and two in 18 19-1820, there would be thirty of them. \ 
But this would be counting John Langdon, Roger Sherman, 
William Few, Rufus King, and George Read each twice, 
and Abraham Baldwin three times. The true number of 
those of the "thirty-nine" whom I have shown to have acted 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 19 

upon the question which, by the text, they understood better 
than we, is twenty-three, leaving sixteen not shown to have 
acted upon it in any way. 

Here, then, we have twenty-three out of our thirty-nine 
fathers "who framed the government under which we Hve," 
who have, upon their official responsibility and their corporal 
oaths, acted upon the verj^ question which the text affirms 
they "understood just as well, and even better, than we 
do now" ; and twenty-one of them — a clear majority of the 
whole "thirty-nine" — so acting upon it as to make them 
guilty of gross political impropriety and willful perjury if, in 
their understanding, any proper division between local and 
federal authority, or anything in the Constitution they had 
made themselves, and sworn to support, forbade the federal 
government to control as to slavery in the federal territories. 
Thus the twenty-one acted ; and, as actions speak louder 
than words, so actions under such responsibility speak still 
louder. 

Two of the twenty-three voted against congressional 
prohibition of slavery in the federal territories, in the in- 
stances in which they acted upon the question. But for 
what reasons they so voted is not known. They may have 
done so because they thought a proper division of local from 
federal authority, or some provision or principle of the 
Constitution, stood in the way, or they may, without any 
such question, have voted against the prohibition on what 
appeared to them to be sufficient grounds of expediency. 
No one who has sworn to support the Constitution can con- 
scientiously vote for what he understands to be an uncon- 
stitutional measure, however expedient he may think it; 
but one may and ought to vote against a measure which he 
deems constitutional if, at the same time, he deems it inex- 
pedient. It, therefore, would be unsafe to set down even the 
two who voted against the prohibition as having done so 
because, in their understanding, any proper division of local 
from federal authority, or anything in the Constitution, for- 



I20 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

bade the federal government to control as to slavery in 
■ federal territory. The remaining sixteen of the ''thirty- 
nine," so far as I have discovered, have left no record of their 
understanding upon the direct question of federal control of 
slavery in the federal territories. But there is much reason 
to believe that their understanding upon that question would 
not have appeared different from that of their twenty-three 
compeers, had it been manifested at all. 

For the purpose of adhering rigidly to the text, I have 
purposely omitted whatever understanding may have been 
manifested by any person, however distinguished, other 
than the thirty-nine fathers who framed the original Con- 
stitution ; and, for the same reason, I have also omitted 
whatever understanding may have been manifested by any 
of the "thirty-nine" even on any other phase of the general 
question of slavery. If we should look into their acts and 
declarations on those other phases, as the foreign slave 
trade, and the morality and policy of slavery generally, it 
would appear to us that on the direct question of federal 
control of slavery in federal territories, the sixteen, if they 
had acted at all, would probably have acted just as the twenty- 
three did. Among that sixteen were several of the most 
noted antislavery men of those times, — as Dr. Franklin, 
Alexander Hamilton, and Gouverneur Morris, — while 
there was not one now known to have been otherwise, unless 
it may be John Rutledge, of South Carolina. 

The sum of the whole is that of our thirty-nine fathers who 
framed the original Constitution, twenty-one — a clear 
majority of the whole — certainly understood that no proper 
division of local from federal authority, nor any part of the 
Constitution, forbade the federal government to control 
slavery in the federal territories; while all the rest had 
probably the same understanding. Such, unquestionably, 
was the understanding of our fathers who framed the origi- 
nal Constitution ; and the text affirms that they understood 
the question ''better than we." 



I 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 121 

But, so far, I have been considering the understanding of 
the question manifested by the framers of the original 
Constitution. In and by the original instrument, a mode 
was provided for amending it; and, as I have already 
stated, the present frame of ''the government under which 
we live" consists of that original, and twelve amendatory 
articles framed and adopted since. Those who now insist 
that federal control of slavery in federal territories violates 
the Constitution, point us to the provisions which they sup- 
pose it thus violates ; and, as I understand, they all fix upon 
provisions in these amendatory articles, and not in the origi- 
nal instrument. The Supreme Court, in the Dred Scott 
case, plant themselves upon the fifth amendment, which 
provides that no person shall be deprived of "life, liberty, or 
property without due process of law" ; while Senator Douglas 
and his peculiar adherents plant themselves upon the tenth 
amendment, providing that "the powders not delegated to the 
United States by the Constitution" "are reserved to the 
states respectively, or to the people." 

Now, it so happens that these amendments were framed 
by the first Congress which sat under the Constitution — the 
identical Congress which passed the act, already mentioned, 
enforcing the prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern 
Territory. Not only was it the same Congress, but they were 
the identical, same individual men who, at the same session, 
and at the same time within the session, had under considera- 
tion, and in progress toward maturity, these constitutional 
amendments, and this act prohibiting slavery in all the 
territory the nation then owned. The constitutional amend- 
ments were introduced before, and passed after, the act 
enforcing the ordinance of '87; so that, during the whole 
pendency of the act to enforce the ordinance, the constitu- 
tional amendments vv^ere also pending. 

The seventy-six members of that Congress, including 
sixteen of the framers of the original Constitution, as before 
stated, were preeminently our fathers who framed that part 



122 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

of ''the government under which we live" which is now 
claimed as forbidding the federal government to control 
slavery in the federal territories. 

Is it not a little presumptuous in any one at this day to 
affirm that the two things which that Congress deliberately 
framed, and carried to maturity at the same time, are abso- 
lutely inconsistent with each other ? And does not such 
affirmation become impudently absurd when coupled with 
the other affirmation, from the same mouth, that those 
who did the two things alleged to be inconsistent, understood 
whether they really were inconsistent better than we — 
better than he who affirms that they are inconsistent ? 

It is surely safe to assume that the thirty-nine framers of 
the original Constitution, and the seventy-six members of 
the Congress which framed the amendments thereto, taken 
together, do certainly include those who may be fairly called 
"our fathers who framed the government under which we 
live." And so assuming, I defy any man to show that any 
one of them ever, in his whole life, declared that, in his 
understanding, any proper division of local from federal 
authority, or any part of the Constitution, forbade the 
federal government to control as to slavery in the federal 
territories. I go a step further. I defy any one to show that 
any living man in the whole world ever did, prior to the 
beginning of the present century (and I might almost say 
prior to the beginning of the last half of the present century), 
declare that, in his understanding, any proper division of 
local from federal authority, or any part of the Constitution, 
forbade the federal government to control as to slavery in the 
federal territories. To those who now so declare I give not 
only "our fathers who framed the government under which 
we live," but with them all other living men within the cen- 
tury in which it was framed, among whom to search, and 
they shall not be able to find the evidence of a single man 
agreeing with them. 

Now, and here, let me guard a little against being mis- 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 23 

understood. I do not mean to say we are bound to follow 
implicitly in whatever our fathers did. To do so, would be 
to discard all the lights of current experience — to reject all 
progress, all improvement. What I do say is, that if we 
would supplant the opinions and policy of our fathers in 
any case, we should do so upon evidence so conclusive, and 
argument so clear, that even their great authority, fairly 
considered and weighed, cannot stand ; and most surely 
not in a case whereof we ourselves declare they understood 
the question better than we. 

If any man at this day sincerely believes that a proper 
division of local from federal authority, or any part of the 
Constitution, forbids the federal government to control as to 
slavery in the federal territories, he is right to say so, and to 
enforce his position by all truthful evidence and fair argument 
which he can. But he has no right to mislead others who 
have less access to history, and less leisure to study it, into 
the false belief that "our fathers who framed the government 
under which we live" were of the same opinion — thus sub- 
stituting falsehood and deception for truthful evidence and 
fair argument. If any man at this day sincerely believes 
"our fathers who framed the government under which we 
live" used and applied principles, in other cases, which 
ought to have led them to understand that a proper division 
of local from federal authority, or some part of the Con- 
stitution, forbids the federal government to control as to 
slavery in the federal territories, he is right to say so. But he 
should, at the same time, brave the responsibility of declar- 
ing that, in his opinion, he understands their principles better 
than they did themselves; and especially should he not 
shirk that responsibility by asserting that they " understood 
the question just as well and even better than we do 
now. 

But enough ! Let all who believe that "our fathers who 
framed the government under which we live understood this 
question just as well, and even better than we do now," 



124 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

speak as they spoke, and act as they acted upon it. This is 
all Republicans ask, all Republicans desire, in relation to 
slavery. As those fathers marked it, so let it be again 
marked, as an evil not to be extended, but to be tolerated and I 
protected only because of and so far as its actual presence J 
among us makes that toleration and protection a necessity. 
Let all the guaranties those fathers gave it be not grudg- 
ingly, but fully, and fairly maintained. For this Republi- 
cans contend, and with this, so far as I know or believe, they 
will be content. 

And now, if they would listen, — as I suppose they will 
not, — I would address a few words to the Southern people. 

I would say to them : You consider yourselves a reason- 
able and a just people; and I consider that in the general 
qualities of reason and justice you are not inferior to any 
other people. Still, when you speak of us Republicans, you 
do so only to denounce us as reptiles, or, at the best, as no 
better than outlaws. You will grant a hearing to pirates or 
murderers, but nothing Hke it to " Black Republicans." 
In all your contentions with one another, each of you deems 
an unconditional condemnation of "Black Republicanism" 
as the first thing to be attended to. Indeed, such condemna- 
tion of us seems to be an indispensable prerequisite — license, 
so to speak — among you to be admitted or permitted to 
speak at all. Now, can you or not be prevailed upon to 
pause and to consider whether this is quite just to us, or even 
to yourselves ? Bring forward your charges and specifica- 
tions, and then be patient long enough to hear us deny or 
justify. 

You say we are sectional. We deny it. That makes an 
issue; and the burden of proof is upon you. You produce 
your proof; and what is it ? Why, that our party has no 
existence in your section — gets no votes in your section. 
The fact is substantially true; but does it prove the issue ^ 
If it does, then, in case we should, without change of principle, 
begin to get votes in your section, we should thereby cease 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 25 

to be sectional. You cannot escape this conclusion ; and 
yet, are you willing' to abide by it ? If you are, you will 
probably soon find that we have ceased to be sectional, for 
we shall get votes in your section this very year. You will 
then begin to discover, as the truth plainly is, that your 
proof does not touch the issue. The fact that we get no 
votes in your section is a fact of your making, and not of 
ours. And if there be fault in that fact, that fault is prima- 
rily yours, and remains so until you show that we repel you 
by some wrong principle or practice. If we do repel you 
by any wrong principle or practice, the fault is ours ; but 
this brings you to where you ought to have started — to a 
discussion of the right or wrong of our principle. If our 
principle, put in practice, would wrong your section for the 
benefit of ours, or for any other object, then our principle, 
and we with it, are sectional, and are justly opposed and 
denounced as such. Meet us, then, on the question of 
whether our principle, put in practice, would wrong your 
section; and so meet us as if it were possible that something 
may be said on our side. Do you accept the challenge ^ 
No ! Then you really believe that the principle which *'our 
fathers who framed the government under which we live" 
thought so clearly right as to adopt it, and indorse it again 
and again, upon their official oaths, is in fact so clearly 
wrong as to demand your condemnation without a moment's 
consideration. 

Some of you delight to flaunt in our faces the warning 
against sectional parties given by Washington in his Fare- 
well Address. Less than eight years before Washington 
gave that warning he had, as President of the United States, 
approved and signed an act of Congress enforcing the 
prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern Territory, which 
act embodied the policy of the government upon that subject 
up to and at the very moment he penned that warning ; and 
about one year after he penned it, he wrote Lafayette that 
he considered that prohibition a wise measure, expressing 



126 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, iS6o 

in the same connection his hope that we should at some time 
have a confederacy of free states. 

Bearing this in mind, and seeing that sectionalism has 
since arisen upon this same subject, is that warning a weapon 
in your hands against us, or in our hands against you ? 
Could Washington himself speak, would he cast the blame 
of that sectionalism upon us, who sustain his policy, or upon 
you, who repudiate it ? We respect that warning of Wash- 
ington, and we commend it to you, together with his example 
pointing to the right application of it. 

But you say you are conservative — eminently conserva- 
tive — while we are revolutionary, destructive, or some- 
thing of the sort. 

What is conservatism ? Is it not adherence to the old 
and tried, against the new and untried ? We stick to, con- 
tend for, the identical old policy on the point in controversy 
which was adopted by "our fathers who framed the govern- 
ment under which we live"; while you with one accord 
reject, and scout, and spit upon that old policy, and insist 
upon substituting something new. True, you disagree 
among yourselves as to what that substitute shall be. You 
are divided on new propositions and plans, but you are 
unanimous in rejecting and denouncing the old policy of the 
fathers. Some of you are for reviving the foreign slave 
trade ; some for a congressional slave code for the territories ; 
some for Congress forbidding the territories to prohibit 
slavery within their limits ; some for maintaining slavery in 
the territories through the judiciary; some for the "gur-reat 
pur-rinciple" that "if one man would enslave another, no 
third man should object," fantastically called "popular 
sovereignty"; but never a man among you is in favor of 
federal prohibition of slavery in federal territories, according 
to the practice of "our fathers who framed the government 
under which we live." Not one of all your various plans can 
show a precedent or an advocate in the century within which 
our government originated. Consider, then, whether your 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 27 

claim of conservatism for yourselves, and your charge of 
destructiveness against us, are based on the most clear and 
stable foundations. 

Again, you say we have made the slavery question more 
prominent than it formerly was. We deny it. We admit 
that it is more prominent, but we deny that we made it so. 
It was not we, but you, who discarded the old policy of the 
fathers. We resisted, and still resist, your innovation ; 
and thence comes the greater prominence of the question. 
Would you have that question reduced to its former propor- 
tions .? Go back to that old policy. What has been will be 
again, under the same conditions. If you would have the 
peace of the old times, readopt the precepts and policy of the 
old times. 

You charge that we stir up insurrections among your 
slaves. We deny it ; and what is your proof ? Harpers 
Ferry! John Brown! John Brown was no Republican; 
and you have failed to implicate a single Republican in his 
Harpers Ferry enterprise. If any member of our party is 
guilty in that matter, you know it, or you do not know it. 
If you do know it, you are inexcusable for not designating 
the man and proving the fact. If you do not know it, you 
are inexcusable for asserting it, and especially for persisting 
in the assertion after you have tried and failed to make the 
proof. You need not be told that persisting in a charge 
which one does not know to be true is simply malicious 
slander. 

Some of you admit that no Republican designedly aided or 
encouraged the Harpers Ferry affair, but still insist that our 
doctrines and declarations necessarily lead to such results. 
We do not believe it. We know we hold no doctrine, and 
make no declaration, which were not held to and made by 
*'our fathers who framed the government under which we 
live." You never dealt fairly by us in relation to this affair. 
When it occurred, some important state elections were near 
at hand, and you were in evident glee with the belief that, by 



128 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

charging the blame upon us, you could get an advantage of 
us in those elections. The elections came, and your expec- 
tations were not quite fulfilled. Every Republican man 
knew that, as to himself at least, your charge was a slander, 
and he was not much inclined by it to cast his vote in your 
favor. Republican doctrines and declarations are accom- 
panied with a continual protest against any interference 
whatever with your slaves, or with you about your slaves. 
Surely this does not encourage them to revolt. True, we do, 
in common with "our fathers who framed the government 
under which we live," declare our belief that slavery is 
wrong ; but the slaves do not hear us declare even this. For 
anything we say or do, the slaves would scarcely know there 
is a Republican party. I believe they would not, in fact, 
generally know it but for your misrepresentations of us in 
their hearing. In your political contests among yourselves, 
each faction charges the other with sympathy with Black 
Republicanism ; and then, to give point to the charge, defines 
Black Republicanism to simply be insurrection, blood, and 
thunder among the slaves. 

Slave insurrections are no more common now than they 
were before the Republican party was organized. What 
induced the Southampton insurrection, twenty-eight years 
ago, in which at least three times as many lives were lost as 
at Harpers Ferry ? You can scarcely stretch your very 
elastic fancy to the conclusion that Southampton was "got 
up by Black Republicanism." In the present state of things 
in the United States, I do not think a general, or even a very 
extensive, slave insurrection is possible. The indispensable 
concert of action cannot be attained. The slaves have no 
means of rapid communication ; nor can incendiary freemen, 
black or white, supply it. The explosive materials are every- 
where in parcels ; but there neither are, nor can be supplied, 
the indispensable connecting trains. 

Much is said by Southern people about the aflFection of 
slaves for their masters and mistresses ; and a part of it, at 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 1 29 

least, is true. A plot for an uprising could scarcely be 
devised and communicated to twenty individuals before 
some one of them, to save the life of a favorite master or 
mistress, would divulge it. This is the rule; and the slave 
revolution in Haiti was not an exception to it, but a case 
occurring under peculiar circumstances. The Gunpowder 
Plot of British history, though not connected with slaves, 
was more in point. In that case, on\f about twenty were 
admitted to the secret; and yet one of them, in his anxiety 
to save a friend, betrayed the plot to that friend, and, by 
consequence, averted the calamity. Occasional poisonings 
from the kitchen, and open or stealthy assassinations in the 
field, and local revolts extending to a score or so, will con- 
tinue to occur as the natural results of slavery ; but no general 
insurrection of slaves, as I think, can happen in this country 
for a long time. Whoever much fears, or much hopes, for 
such an event, will be alike disappointed. 

In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years 
ago, *'It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipa- 
tion and deportation peaceably, and in such slow degrees as 
that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their places be, 
pari passu, filled up by free white laborers. If, on the con- 
trary, it is left to force itself on, human nature must shudder 
at the prospect held up." 

Mr. Jefferson did not mean to say, nor do I, that the 
power of emancipation is in the federal government. He 
spoke of Virginia; and, as to the power of emancipation, I 
speak of the slaveholding states only. The federal govern- 
ment, however, as we insist, has the power of restraining the 
extension of the institution — the power to insure that a 
slave insurrection shall never occur on any American soil 
which is now free from slavery. 

John Brown's effort was peculiar. It was not a slave 
insurrection. It was an attempt by white men to get up a 
revolt among slaves, in which the slaves refused to partici- 
pate. In fact, it was so absurd that the slaves, with all 

LINCOLN — 9 



130 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, iS6o 

their ignorance, saw plainly enough it could not succeed. 
That affair, in its philosophy, corresponds with the many 
attempts, related in history, at the assassination of kings 
and emperors. An enthusiast broods over the oppres- 
sion of a people till he fancies himself commissioned by 
Heaven to liberate them. He ventures the attempt, which 
ends in little else than his own execution. Orsini's attempt 
on Louis Napoleon, *and John Brown's attempt at Harpers 
Ferry, were, in their philosophy, precisely the same. The 
eagerness to cast blame on Old England in the one case, and 
on New England in the other, does not disprove the sameness 
of the two things. 

And how much would it avail you if you could, by the 
use of John Brown, Helper's book,^ and the like, break up 
the Republican organization 1 Human action can be modi- 
fied to some extent, but human nature cannot be changed. 
There is a judgment and a feeling against slavery in this 
nation, which cast at least a million and a half of votes. 
You cannot destroy that judgment and feeling — that 
sentiment — by breaking up the political organization which 
rallies around it. You can scarcely scatter and disperse an 
army which has been formed into order in the face of your 
heaviest fire; but if you could, how much would you gain by 
forcing the sentiment which created it out of the peaceful 
channel of the ballot box into some other channel .? What 
would that other channel probably be ? Would the number 
of John Browns be lessened or enlarged by the operation .? 

But you will break up the Union rather than submit to a 
denial of your constitutional rights. 

That has a somewhat reckless sound ; but it would be 
palliated, if not fully justified, were we proposing, by the 
mere force of numbers, to deprive you of some right plainly 
written down in the Constitution. But we are proposing 
no such thing. 

1 "Impending Crisis of the South," by Hinton R. Helper, published 1857. 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 13 1 

When you make these declarations you have a specific 
and well-understood allusion to an assumed constitutional 
right of yours to take slaves into the federal territories, and 
to hold them there as property. But no such right is spe- 
cifically written in the Constitution. That instrument is 
literally silent about any such right. We, on the contrary, 
deny that such a right has any existence in the Constitution, 
even by implication. 

Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will de- 
stroy the government, unless you be allowed to construe and 
force the Constitution as you please, on all points in dis- 
pute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all 
events. 

This, plainly stated, is your language. Perhaps you will 
say the Supreme Court has decided the disputed constitu- 
tional question in your favor. Not quite so. But waiving 
the lawyer's distinction between dictum and decision, the 
court has decided the question for you in a sort of way. The 
court has substantially said, it is your constitutional right to 
take slaves into the federal territories, and to hold them there 
as property. When I say the decision was made in a sort of 
way, I mean it was made in a divided court, by a bare major- 
ity of the judges, and they not quite agreeing with one 
another in the reasons for making it; that it is so made as 
that its avowed supporters disagree with one another about 
its meaning, and that it was mainly based upon a mistaken 
statement of fact — the statement in the opinion that '*the 
right of property in a slave is distinctly and expressly affirmed 
in the Constitution." 

An inspection of the Constitution will show that the right of 
property in a slave is not *' distinctly and expressly affirmed" 
in it. Bear in mind, the judges do not pledge their judicial 
opinion that such right is impliedly affirmed in the Con- 
stitution ; but they pledge their veracity that i^ is "dis- 
tinctly and expressly" affirmed there — ''distinctly," that 
is, not mingled with anything else; "expressly," that is, in 



132 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

words meaning just that, without the aid of any inference, 
and susceptible of no other meaning. 

If they had only pledged their judicial opinion that such 
right is affirmed in the instrument by implication, it would be 
open to others to show that neither the word ''slave" nor 
''slavery" is to be found in the Constitution, nor the word 
"property," even, in any connection with language alluding 
to the things slave or slavery; and that wherever in that 
instrument the slave is alluded to, he is called a "person"; 
and wherever his master's legal right in relation to him is 
alluded to, it is spoken of as "service or labor which may be 
due" — as a debt payable in service or labor. Also it would 
be open to show, by contemporaneous history, that this mode 
of alluding to slaves and slavery, instead of speaking of them, 
was employed on purpose to exclude from the Constitution 
the idea that there could be property in man. 

To show all this is easy and certain. 

When this obvious mistake of the judges shall be brought 
to their notice, is it not reasonable to expect that they will 
withdraw the mistaken statement, and reconsider the con- 
clusion based upon it ^ 

And then it is to be remembered that "our fathers who 
framed the government under which we live" — the men 
who made the Constitution — decided this same constitu- 
tional question in our favor long ago; decided it without 
division among themselves when making the decision ; 
without division among themselves about the meaning of it 
after it was made, and, so far as any evidence is left, without 
basing it upon any mistaken statement of facts. 

Under all these circumstances, do you really feel your- 
selves justified to break up this government unless such a 
court decision as yours is shall be at once submitted to as a 
conclusive and final rule of political action ? But you will 
not abid^ the election of a Republican President ! In that 
supposed event, you say, you will destroy the Union ; and 
then, you say, the great crime of having destroyed it will be 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 I33 

upon us ! That is cool. A highwayman holds a pistol to 
my ear, and mutters through his teeth, ''Stand and deliver, 
or I shall kill you, and then you will be a murderer !" 

To be sure, what the robber demanded of me — my 
money — was my own; and I had a clear right to keep it; 
but it was no more my own than my vote is my own; and 
the threat of death to me, to extort my money, and the 
threat of destruction to the Union, to extort my vote, can 
scarcely be distinguished in principle. 

A few words now to Republicans. It is exceedingly 
desirable that all parts of this great confederacy shall be at 
peace, and in harmony one with another. Let us Republi- 
cans do our part to have it so. Even though much provoked, 
let us do nothing through passion and ill temper. Even 
though the Southern people will not so much as listen to us, 
let us calmly consider their demands, and yield to them if, in 
our deliberate view of our duty, we possibly can. Judging 
by all they say and do, and by the subject and nature of 
their controversy with us, let us determine, if we can, what 
will satisfy them. 

Will they be satisfied if the territories be unconditionally 
surrendered to them ? We know they will not. In all their 
present complaints against us, the territories are scarcely 
mentioned. Invasions and insurrections are the rage now. 
Will it satisfy them if, in the future, we have nothing to do 
with invasions and insurrections ? We know it will not. 
We so know, because we know we never had anything to do 
with invasions and insurrections ; and yet this total abstain- 
ing does not exempt us from the charge and the denuncia- 
tion. 

The question recurs, What will satisfy them ? Simply 
this : we must not only let them alone, but we must somehow 
convince them that we do let them alone. This, we know by 
experience, is no easy task. We have been so trying to 
convince them from the very beginning of our organization, 
but with no success. In all our platforms and speeches we 



134 SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 

have constantly protested our purpose to let them alone; 
but this has had no tendency to convince them. Alike 
unavailing to convince them is the fact that they have never 
detected a man of us in any attempt to disturb them. 

These natural and apparently adequate means all failing, 
what will convince them .? This, and this only : cease to 
call slavery wrong, and join them in calling it right. And 
this must be done thoroughly — done in acts as well as in 
words. Silence will not be tolerated — we must place our- 
selves avowedly with them. Senator Douglas's new sedition 
law must be enacted and enforced, suppressing all declara- 
tions that slavery is wrong, whether made in politics, in 
presses, in pulpits, or in private. We must arrest and return 
their fugitive slaves with greedy pleasure. We must pull 
down our free-state constitutions. The whole atmosphere 
must b^ disinfected from all taint of opposition to slavery, 
before they will cease to believe that all their troubles proceed 
from us. 

I am quite aware they do not state their case precisely in 
this way. Most of them would probably say to us, "Let us 
alone; do nothing to us, and say what you please about 
slavery." But we do let them alone, — have never dis- 
turbed them, — so that, after all, it is what we say which 
dissatisfies them. They will continue to accuse us of doing, 
until we cease saying. 

I am also aware they have not as'yet in terms demanded the 
overthrow of our free-state constitutions. Yet those con- 
stitutions declare the wrong of slavery with more solemn 
emphasis than do all other sayings against it; and when all 
these other sayings shall have been silenced, the overthrow 
of these constitutions will be demanded, and nothing be left 
to resist the demand. It is nothing to the contrary that they 
do not demand the whole of this just now. Demanding 
what they do, and for the reason they do, they can volun- 
tarily stop nowhere short of this consummation. Holding, 
as they do, that slavery is morally right and socially elevat- 



SPEECH AT COOPER INSTITUTE, i860 135 

ing, they cannot cease to demand a full national recognition 
of it as a legal right and a social blessing. 

Nor can we justifiably withhold this on any ground save 
our conviction that slavery is wrong. If slavery is right, 
all words, acts, laws, and constitutions against it are them- 
selves wrong, and should be silenced and swept away. If it is 
right, we cannot justly object to its nationality — its univer- 
sality ; if it is wrong, they cannot justly insist upon its exten- 
sion — its enlargement. All they ask we could readily grant, 
if we thought slavery right; all we ask they could as readily 
grant, if they thought it wrong. Their thinking it right and 
our thinking it wrong is the precise fact upon which depends 
the whole controversy. Thinking it right, as they do, they 
are not to blame for desiring its full recognition as being 
right ; but thinking it wrong, as we do, can we yield to them ? 
Can we cast our votes with their view, and against our own ? 
In view of our moral, social, and political responsibilities, 
can we do this ? 

Wrong as we think slavery is, we can yet afford to let it 
alone where it is, because that much is due to the necessity 
arising from its actual presence in the nation ; but can we, 
while our votes will prevent it, allow it to spread into the 
national territories, and to overrun us here in these free 
states ? If our sense of duty forbids this, then let us stand 
by our duty fearlessly and effectively. Let us be diverted 
by none of those sophistical contrivances wherewith we are 
so industriously plied and belabored, — contrivances such 
as groping for some middle ground between the right and the 
wrong, vain as the search for a man who should be neither a 
living man nor a dead man ; such as a policy of "don't care," 
on a question about which all true men do care; such as 
Union appeals beseeching true Union men to yield to dis- 
unionists, reversing the Divine rule, and calling not the 
sinners, but the righteous to repentance ; su^h as invocations 
to Washington, imploring men to unsay what Washington 
said, and undo what Washington did. 



1^6 LETTER TO ''PROFESSOR'' GARDNER, i860 

Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusa- 
tions against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of destruc- 
tion to the government, nor of dungeons to ourselves. Let 
us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith let 
us to the end dare to do our duty as we understand it. 



LETTER TO "PROFESSOR" GARDNER 

Springfield, III., September 28, i860. 

Dear Sir : Some specimens of your soap have been used 
at our house and Mrs. L. declares it is a superior article. 
She at the same time protests that / have never given suffi- 
cient attention to the "soap question" to be a competent 
judge. 

Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 

LETTER TO GRACE BEDELL 

The story which explains this letter is well known. Grace Bedell, a girl 
of eleven, had conceived the fancy that the presidential candidate "would 
look better if he wore a beard," and had written to him that "if he would 
promise to do so" she would "try to influence her two Democratic brothers 
to vote for him." Despite the implied refusal in this letter, Mr. Lincoln 
did as the little girl asked. On his way to Washington, the following 
February, he passed through the town where the child lived and supple- 
mented his brief political speech by calling for his "little correspondent" 
and announcing to her "You see I let these whiskers grow for you, Grace." 
No incident better illustrates the childlike frankness and simplicity of 
Lincoln's nature. Of the hundreds of portraits of Abraham Lincoln those 
which represent him as beardless were all taken before February, 1861. 

Springfield, Illinois, October 19, i860. 

My dear little Miss : Your very agreeable letter of the 

15th is received. I regret the necessity of saying I have no 

daughter. I have three sons — one seventeen, one nine, 

and one seven years of age. They, with their mother, con- 



LETTER TO W. S. SPEER, i860 137 

stitute my whole family. As to the whiskers, having never 
worn any, do you not think people would call it a piece of 
silly affectation if I were to begin it now ? 

Your very sincere well-wisher, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO WILLIAM S. SPEER 

Lincoln's utterances of this period are singularly free from any evidence 
of excitement. The spirit of panic was universal. Southern agitators 
were making revolutionary demands, while Northern leaders were in hope- 
less disagreement, some proposing by constitutional amendment, or by 
treaty between the states, to grant all that the slave power wished, and 
some advocating the coercion of the dissatisfied states and the abolition of 
slavery regardless of the Constitution, while still others were for permitting 
the seceding states to "depart in peace." Many believed that the nation 
would not live until Lincoln could become President. Lincoln's real views 
were well known. He opposed the introduction of slavery into the na- 
tional territories or into the free states, but he also opposed any interfer- 
ence with the right to hold slaves where that right already existed under the 
Constitution. The Southern leaders did not trust him. His Northern 
friends, quite as agitated as the men of the South, urged him to say some- 
thing pacific. Lincoln wisely maintained silence. 

(Confidential) 
Springfield, Illinois, October 23, i860. 

My dear Sir: Yours of the 13th was duly received. I 
appreciate your motive when you suggest the propriety of 
my writing for the public something disclaiming all inten- 
tion to interfere with slaves or slavery in the states ; but in 
my judgment it would do no good. I have already done 
this many, many times ; and it is in print, and open to all 
who will read. Those who will not read or heed what I have 
already publicly said would not read or heed a repetition of 
it. *' If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will 
they be persuaded though one rose from the dead.'' 

Yours truly, 
A. Lincoln. 



138 LETTER TO PETER PAGE, 1861 

LETTER TO PETER PAGE 

When this letter was written, the friends of the Union were in grave I 
fear lest the secessionists organize to prevent Lincoln's inauguration. 
The following letter, in response to the offer of Mr. Page and his asso- 
ciates to raise a fund to insure the inauguration of the new President, re- 
gardless of Southern interference, has never before been published. 

(Private) 

Springfield, Jany. 21st, 1861. 
Peter Page, Esq. 

Dear Sir : While an almost overwhelming amount of 
business and correspondence has prevented my sooner an- 
swering your letter of the 3d inst., you may rest assured that 
it has neither been forgotten nor overlooked. Permit me 
now to return you my heartfelt thanks for your very gen- 
erous offer of both personal service and pecuniary aid, to 
secure my inauguration. While it is a very gratifying per- 
sonal compliment to myself, I prize it more highly as an 
evidence of the public loyalty and devotion to our Govern- 
ment which I am confident almost unanimously pervades 
the people of this state. Happily, I think there is no imme- 
diate necessity for employing the proffered help, and while 
I hope the ten thousand dollars you propose to give may 
always be employed in the peaceful channels of business or 
commerce, I am pleased to have the assurance that in the 
event of trouble or danger, you and others stand ready to 
give both your lives and your fortunes to the defense and 
maintenance of the government and the Union. 

Your obedient Servant, 

A. Lincoln. 

THE FAREWELL AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 
February 11, 1861 

A crowd of a few hundred neighbors and friends had gathered in the rain 
to bid Lincoln good-bye. As he stood on the rear platform of the train 



SPRINGFIELD FAREWELL, 1861 139 

he had not meant to make a speech, but the sight of so many who were dear 
to him and the feehng that he might never see them again led him to give 
this expression to the most sacred feeHngs of his heart. This Httle speech 
has a high Hterary quahty, but what gives it value is the revelation it 
affords of the speaker's inner life. 

My Friends : No one, not in my situation, can appreciate 
my feeling of sadness at this parting. To this place, and 
the kindness of these people, I owe everything. Here I 
have lived a quarter of a century, and have passed from 
a young to an old man. Here my children have been born, 
and one is buried. All the strange, checkered past seems to 
crowd upon my mind. I now leave, not knowing when or 
whether ever I may return, with a task before me greater 
than that which rested upon Washington. Without the 
assistance of that Divine Being who ever attended him, I 
cannot succeed. With that assistance, I cannot fail. Trust- 
ing in Him, who can go with me, and remain with you, and 
be everywhere for good, let us confidently hope that all will 
yet be well. To His care commending you, as I hope in 
your prayers you will commend me, I bid you an affectionate 
farewell. 



FROM A REPLY TO THE ADDRESS OF WELCOME AT 
INDIANAPOLIS, FEBRUARY 11, 1861 

This speech is the first public expression of Lincoln's attitude towards se- 
cession and of his faith that the people would support him in his task of pre- 
serving the Union. Governor Morton had tried to draw him out by saying, 
"Our government, which but yesterday was the theme of every eulogy, and 
the admiration of the world, is to-day threatening to crumble into ruins, and 
it remains to be seen whether it possesses a living principle, or whether, in the 
fullness of time, the hour of its dissolution is at hand." The declaration 
that "with you is the question: Shall the Union and shall the liberties of 
this country be preserved to the latest generation," is prophetic of the lan- 
guage of the first inaugural address, which he had already prepared, and of 
the first call for volunteer soldiers which he was to issue two months later, 
after the assault upon Fort Sumter. The final sentence of the speech has 
been incorporated in a bronze memorial tablet at the place in Indianapolis 



I40 ADDRESS AT INDIANAPOLIS, 1861 

where Lincoln stood. In this speech, Lincoln, as was his custom, used the 
language of Scripture as the surest appeal to the emotion of his hearers. 
Lincoln's use of Bible allusions and language is to be noted in many of his 
letters and in all his greater utterances. Thus, here, "The gates of hell 
cannot prevail against them." Illustrations elsewhere are many. Thus, the 
reference to Haman's gallows in the Speed letter of August 24, 1855 (p. 59) ; 
in the "House Divided" speech, "A living dog is better than a dead lion " 
(p. 68); in the message to Congress of December i, 1862, "One generation 
passeth away and another generation cometh, but the earth abideth forever " 
(p. 179); and in the Sanitary Fair speech of March 18, 1864 (p. 203); the 
Fast-day proclamation of August 12, 1861 (p. 163) employs biblical language 
throughout, the words of the psalmist, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning 
of wisdom," being the keynote of the document. The second inaugural 
(p. 214) is in the style and spirit of an Old Testament prophecy. 

Following this speech at Indianapolis, Lincoln stopped at Columbus, 
Cleveland, Buffalo, Utica, Albany, New York, Trenton, Philadelphia, and 
man}^ other points, appealing to the sentiment of nationality and union in 
the multitudes whom he addressed. Six of the speeches are given in this 
volume. 



Governor Morton and Fellow Citizens of the State 
OF Indiana : . . . You have been pleased to address your- 
self to me chiefly in behalf of this glorious Union in which we 
live, in all of which you have my hearty sympathy, and, as 
far as may be within my power, will have, one and insep- 
arably, my hearty cooperation. While I do not expect, upon 
this occasion, or until I get to Washington, to attempt any 
lengthy speech, I will only say that to the salvation of the 
Union there needs but one single thing, the hearts of a people ' 
like yours. When the people rise in mass in behalf of the 
Union and the liberties of this country, truly may it be said, 
"The gates of hell cannot prevail against them." In all try- 
ing positions in which I shall be placed, and doubtless I shall 
be placed in many such, my reliance will be upon you and 
the people of the United States ; and I wish you to remem- 
ber, now and forever, that it is your business, and not mine; 
that if the union of these states and the liberties of this people 
shall be lost, it is but little to an}^ one man of fifty-two years 
of age, but a great deal to the thirty millions of people who 



ADDRESS TO THE OHIO LEGISLATURE, iS6i 141 

inhabit these United States and to their posterity in all com- 
ing time. It is your business to rise up and preserve the 
Union and liberty for yourselves, and not for me. I appeal 
to you again to constantly bear in mind that not with politi- 
cians, not with Presidents, not with office seekers, but with 
you, is the question : Shall the Union and shall the liberties 
of this country be preserved to the latest generations ? 



ADDRESS TO THE OHIO LEGISLATURE AT COLUMBUS 

February 13, 1861 

Note Lincoln's modesty in the reference to himself: "Without a name, 
perhaps without a reason why I should have a name," and his faith in the 
people and in God. "I turn then, and look to the American people, and 
to that God who has never forsaken them." 

It is true, as has been said by the president of the Senate, 
that a very great responsibility rests upon me in the posi- 
tion to which the votes of the American people have called 
me. I am deeply sensible of that weighty responsibility. 
I cannot but know, what you all know, that without a name, 
perhaps without a reason why I should have a name, there 
has fallen upon me a task such as did not rest even upon the 
Father of his Country ; and so feeling, I can turn and 
look for that support without which it will be impossible 
for me to perform that great task. I turn then, and look 
to the American people, and to that God who has never 
forsaken them. Allusion has been made to the interest 
felt in relation to the policy of the new administration. In 
this I have received from some a degree of credit for having 
kept silence, and from others, some deprecation. I still 
think that I was right. 

In the varying and repeatedly shifting scenes of the pres- 
ent, and without a precedent which could enable me to 
judge by the past, it has seemed fitting that before speaking 
upon the difficulties of Ihe country, I should have gained a 



142 SPEECH AT UTICJ, 1861 

view of the whole field, being at liberty to modify and change 
the course of policy as future events may make a change 
necessary. 

I have not maintained silence from any want of real 
anxiety. It is a good thing that there is no more than anx- 
iety, for there is nothing going wrong. It is a consoling 
circumstance that when we look out, there is nothing that 
really hurts anybody. We entertain different views upon 
political questions, but nobody is suffering anything. This 
is a most consoling circumstance, and from it we may con- 
clude that all we want is time, patience, and a reliance on 
that God who has never forsaken this people. 

Fellow citizens, what I have said I have said altogether 
extemporaneously, and I will now come to a close. 



SPEECH AT UTICA, NEW YORK, FEBRUARY 18, 1861 

In his lightest vein. Lincoln was condemned by many of his associates 
and by the press because of his sense of humor, but it was his sense of humor 
which enabled him to keep his mental balance. 

Ladies and Gentlemen : I have no speech to make to 
you and no time to speak in. I appear before you that I may 
see you, and that you may see me; and I am willing to ad- 
mit, that so far as the ladies are concerned, I have the best 
of the bargain, though I wish it to be understood that I do 
not make the same acknowledgment concerning the men. 



FROM THE ADDRESS TO THE NEW JERSEY SENATE, AT 
TRfiNTON, FEBRUARY 21, 1861 

This speech is especially interesting for the boyhood incident with which 
the speaker enforced his point that the nation for which the men of the 
Revolution struggled so well must be worth preserving. How the boy Lin- 
coln became the owner of Weems's " Washington " is familiar to those who 
know the story of his life. He had borrowed the little biography and had 
taken it to his bed in the loft of his log cabin to read in the early morning. A 



ADDRESS AT TRENTON, iS6i 1 43 

sudden rain in the night soaked the book and the boy had to pay for it by 
three days' hard labor on the owner's farm. Weems's " Washington " is 
not a great hterary work, but as this and other speeches show, it had an in- 
fluence upon Lincoln's career. 

... I cannot but remember the place that New Jersey- 
holds in our early history. In the early Revolutionary 
struggle few of the states among the old thirteen had more 
of the battle fields of the country within their limits than 
New Jersey. May I be pardoned if, upon this occasion, I 
mention that away back in my childhood, the earliest days 
of my being able to read, I got hold of a small book, such a 
one as few of the younger members have ever seen — 
Weems's "Life of Washington." I remember all the ac- 
counts there given of the battle fields and struggles for the 
liberties of the country, and none fixed themselves upon my 
imagination so deeply as the struggle here at Trenton, New 
Jersey. The crossing of the river, the contest with the Hes- 
sians, the great hardships endured at that time, all fixed 
themselves upon my memory more than any single Revolu- 
tionary event ; and you all know, for you have all been boys, 
how those early impressions last longer than any others. 
I recollect thinking then, boy even though I was, that there 
must have been something more than common that these 
men struggled for. I am exceedingly anxious that that 
thing — that something even more than national independ- 
ence ; that something that held out a great promise to all 
the people of the world to all time to come — I am ex- 
ceedingly anxious that this Union, the Constitution, and 
the liberties of the people shall be perpetuated in accord- 
ance with the original idea for which that struggle was made, 
and I shall be most happy indeed if I shall be a humble 
instrument in the hands of the Almighty, and of this. His 
almost chosen people, for perpetuating the object of that great 
struggle. You give me this reception, as I understand, 
without distinction of party. I learn that this body is com- 
posed of a majority of gentlemen who, in the exercise of their 



144 ADDRESS TO NEW JERSEY ASSEMBLY, iS6i 

best judgment in the choice of a chief magistrate, did not 
think I was the man. I understand, nevertheless, that they 
come forward here to greet me as the constitutionally elected 
President of the United States — as citizens of the United 
States to meet the man who, for the time being, is the repre- 
sentative of the majesty of the nation — united by the single 
purpose to perpetuate the Constitution, the Union, and the 
liberties of the people. As such, I accept this reception 
more gratefully than I could do did I believe it were tendered 
to me as an individual. 



FROM AN ADDRESS TO THE ASSEMBLY OF NEW JERSEY 

February 21, 1861 

. . . You, Mr. Speaker, have well said that this is a time 
when the bravest and wisest look with doubt and awe upon 
the aspect presented by our national affairs. Under these 
circumstances you will readily see why I should not speak 
in detail of the course I shall deem it best to pursue. It is 
proper that I should avail myself of all the information and 
all the time at my command, in order that when the time ar- 
rives in which I must speak officially, I shall be able to take 
the ground which I deem best and safest, and from which I 
may have no occasion to swerve. I shall endeavor to take 
the ground I deem most just to the North, the East, the West, 
the South, and the whole country. I take it, I hope, in good 
temper, certainly with no malice toward any section. I shall 
do all that may be in my power to promote a peaceful settle- 
ment of all our difficulties. The man does not live who is 
more devoted to peace than I am, none who would do more 
to preserve it, but it may be necessary to put the foot down 
firmly. [Here the audience broke out into cheers so loud 
and long that for some moments it was impossible to hear 
Mr. Lincoln's voice.] And if I do my duty and do right you 
will sustain me, will you not ? [Loud cheers, and cries of 
"Yes, yes; we will."] Received as I am by the members 



JDDRESS AT PHILADELPHIA, 1861 1 45 

of a legislature the majority of whom do not agree with me 
in political sentiments, I trust that I may have their assist- 
ance in piloting the ship of state through this voyage, sur- 
rounded by perils as it is ; for if it should suffer wreck now, 
there will be no pilot ever needed for another voyage. . . . 



ADDRESS AT INDEPENDENCE HALL, PHILADELPHIA 

February 22, 1861 

Note the prophecy — "But if this country cannot be saved without 
giving up that principle, I was about to say I would rather be assassinated 
on this spot than surrender it." While he was saying this, Lincoln and 
another member of his party knew of a conspiracy to kill him on his 
way to Washington. Already letters of warning had reached him, and 
during the next four years frequent threats of assassination came to him in 
the mails. There was more reality than his audience imagined in his pledge, 
"I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by, and, if it be the 
pleasure of Almighty God, to die by." 

I am filled with deep emotion at finding myself standing 
in this place, where were collected together the wisdom, 
the patriotism, the devotion to principle, from which sprang 
the institutions under which we live. 

You have kindly suggested to me that in my hands is 
the task of restoring peace to our distracted country. I 
can say in return, sir, that all the political sentiments I en- 
tertain have been drawn, so far as I have been able to draw 
them, from the sentiments which originated in and were 
given to the world from this hall. I have never had a feel- 
ing, politically, that did not spring from the sentiments 
embodied in the Declaration of Independence. 

I have often pondered over the dangers which were incurred 
by the men who assembled here and framed and adopted 
that declaration. I have pondered over the toils that were 
endured by the officers and soldiers of the army who achieved 
that independence. I have often inquired of myself what 
great principle or idea it was that kept this Confederacy so 

LINCOLN — 10 



146 ADDRESS AT PHILADELPHIA, 1861 

long together. It was not the mere matter of separation 
of the colonies from the motherland, but that sentiment in 
the Declaration of Independence which gave liberty not 
alone to the people of this country, but hope to all the world, 
for all future time. It was that which gave promise that in 
due time the weights would be lifted from the shoulders of 
all men, and that all should have an equal chance. This 
is the sentiment embodied in the Declaration of Independ- 
ence. 

Now, my friends, can this country be saved on that basis ? 
If it can, I will consider myself one of the happiest men in 
the world if I can help to save it. If it cannot be saved upon 
that principle, it will be truly awful. But if this country 
cannot be saved without giving up that principle, I was 
about to say I would rather be assassinated on this spot than 
surrender it. 

Now, in my view of the present aspect of affairs, there 
is no need of bloodshed and war. There is no necessity 
for it. I am not in favor of such a course ; and I may say 
in advance that there will be no bloodshed unless it is forced 
upon the government. The government will not use force 
unless force is used against it. 

My friends, this is wholly an unprepared speech. I did 
not expect to be called on to say a word when I came here. 
I supposed I was merely to do something toward raising a 
flag. I may, therefore, have said something indiscreet. 
But I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by, 
and, if it be the pleasure of Almighty God, to die by. 

FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, MARCH 4, 1861 

Lincoln read this address from a platform built at the east portico of , 
the Capitol. Ordinances of secession had recently been adopted by seven 
of the Southern states. The appeal of the new President to his "dissatis- 
fied fellow countrymen" was variously received. The South had gone too 
far in its program of disunion to heed the appeal. Horace Greeley says 
("An Estimate of Abraham Lincoln," p. 39) : "The man evidently believed 



FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 1 47 

with all his soul that if he could but convince the South that he would arrest 
and return her fugitive slaves, and offered slavery every support required 
by comity or by the letter of the Constitution, he would avert her hostility, — 
dissolve the Confederacy, and restore throughout the Union the sway of 
the federal authority. There was never a wilder delusion." The North 
did not know Lincoln well enough to be able to form a fair >udgment of the 
speech. On the whole the address was well received. Public feeling was 
too tense to make possible at the time any critical estimate of the speech. 

It is an interesting fact that as Lincoln took the oath of office on this 
occasion the four men closest to him were Stephen A. Douglas, who held 
the speaker's hat, Franklin Pierce, Roger B. Taney, who administered 
the oath, and James Buchanan, the retiring President, the four men whom, 
as "Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James," he had charged with conspiring 
to extend slavery into the territories (" House Divided " speech of June 
16, 1858, p. 73). 

There is no better illustration of Lincoln's literary method than is to be 
found in a comparison of the final paragraph of the address with the para- 
graph which Secretary Seward had submitted. Seward's draft is as follows : 
"I close. We are not, we must not be, aliens or enemies, but fellow country- 
men and brethren. Although passion has strained our bonds of affection 
too hardly, they must not, I am sure they will not, be broken. The mystic 
chords which, proceeding from so many battle fields and so many patriot 
graves, pass through all the hearts and hearths in this broad continent of 
ours, will yet again harmonize in their ancient music when breathed upon 
by the guardian angel of the nation." The idea was Seward's, but the 
high quality of its final literary form was Lincoln's. 

Fellow Citizens of the United States : In compliance 
with a custom as old as the government itself, I appear 
before you to address you briefly, and to take in your pres- 
ence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United 
States to be taken by the President "before he enters on the 
execution of his office." 

I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss 
thbse matters of administration about which there is no 
special anxiety or excitement. 

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the 
Southern states that by the accession of a Republican ad- 
ministration their property and their peace and personal 
security are to be endangered. There has never been any 
reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most 



148 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 

ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and 
been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the 
published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do 
but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that 
'*I have no .purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with 
the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I be- 
lieve I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclina- 
tion to do so." Those who nominated and elected me did 
so with full knowledge that I had made this and many simi- 
lar declarations, and had never recanted them. And, more 
than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, 
and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and em- 
phatic resolution which I now read : 

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the 
states, and especially the right of each state to order and control 
its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment ex- 
clusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the per- 
fection and endurance of our political fabric depend, and we de- 
nounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any 
state or territory, no matter under what pretext, as among the 
gravest of crimes. 

I now reiterate these sentiments ; and, in doing so, I only 
press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence 
of which the case is susceptible, that the property, peace, 
and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered - 
by the now incoming administration. I add, too, that all 
the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and 
the laws, can be given, will be cheerfully given to all the 
states when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause — as 
cheerfully to one section as to another. 

There is much controversy about the delivering up of 
fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as 
plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its pro- 
visions : 



FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 1 49 

No person held to service or labor in one state, under the 
laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any 
law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or 
labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom 
such service or labor may be due. 

It is scarcely questioned that this provision W2.s intended 
by those w^ho made it for the reclaiming of what v^e call 
fugitive slaves ; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. 
All members of Congress swear their support to the whole 
Constitution — to this provision as much as to any other. 
To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come 
within the terms of this clause ''shall be delivered up," their 
oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort 
in good temper, could they not with nearly equal unanimity 
frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that 
unanimous oath .? 

There is some difference of opinion whether this clause 
should be enforced by national or by state authority; but 
surely that difference is not a very material one. If the 
slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence 
to him or to others by which authority it is done. And 
should any one in any case be content that his oath shall go 
unkept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it 
shall be kept .? 

Again, in any law upon this subject, ought not all the 
safeguards of liberty known in civilized and humane juris- 
prudence to be introduced, so that a free man be not, in any 
case, surrendered as a slave .? And might it not be well at 
the same time to provide by law for the enforcement of that 
clause in the Constitution which guarantees that "the citi- 
zen of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and im- 
munities of citizens in the several states V 

I take the official oath to-day with no mental reservations, 
and with no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws 
by any hypercritical rules. And while I do not choose now 



I50 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, iS6i 

to specify particular acts of Congress as proper to be en- 
forced, I do suggest that it will be much safer for all, both 
in official and private stations, to conform to and abide by 
all those acts which stand unrepealed, than to violate any 
of them, trusting to find impunity in having them held to be 
unconstitutional. 

It is sevent3'-two years since the first inauguration of a 
President under our national Constitution. During that 
period fifteen different and greatly distinguished citizens 
have, in succession, administered the executive branch of 
the government. They have conducted it through many 
perils, and generally with great success. Yet, with all this 
scope of precedent, I now enter upon the same task for the 
brief constitutional term of four years under great and 
peculiar difficulty. A disruption of the federal Union, 
heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted. 

I hold that, in contemplation of universal law and of the 
Constitution, the Union of these states is perpetual. Per- 
petuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law 
of all national governments. It is safe to assert that no 
government proper ever had a provision in its organic law 
for its own termination. Continue to execute all the ex- 
press provisions of our national Constitution, and the Union 
will endure forever — it being impossible to destroy it ex- 
cept by some action not provided for in the instrument itself. 

Again, if the United States be not a government proper, 
but an association of states in the nature of contract merely, 
can it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all 
the parties who made it .? One party to a contract may vio- 
late it — break it, so to speak; but does it not require all 
to lawfully rescind it ? 

Descending from these general principles, we find the 
proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is per- 
petual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The 
Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in 
fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured 



P FIRST IN AUGUR JL ADDRESS, iS6i 151 

and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. 
It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen 
states expressly plighted and engaged that it should be per- 
petual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And, finally, 
in 1787 one of the declared objects for ordaining and estab- 
lishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union." 

But if the destruction of the Union by one or by a part 
only of the states be lawfully possible, the Union is less per- 
fect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital ele- 
ment of perpetuity. 

It follows from these views that no state upon its own 
mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union ; that re- 
solves and ordinances to that effect are legally void ; and 
that acts of violence, within any state or states, against the 
authority of the United States, are insurrectionary or revolu- 
tionary, according to circumstances. 

I therefore consider that, in view of the Constitution and 
the laws, the Union is unbroken ; and to the extent of my 
ability I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly 
enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully 
executed in all the states. Doing this I deem to be only a 
simple duty on my part ; and I shall perform it so far as prac- 
ticable, unless my rightful masters, the American people, 
shall withhold the requisite means, or in some authoritative 
manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded 
as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union 
that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself. 

In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence; 
and there shall be none, unless it be forced upon the national 
authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, 
occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to 
the government, and to collect the duties and imposts; but 
beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will 
be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people 
anywhere. Where hostility to the United States, in any 
interior locality, shall be so great and universal as to prevent 



152 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, iS6i 

competent resident citizens from holding the federal offices, 
there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among 
the people for that object. While the strict legal right may 
exist in the government to enforce the exercise of these offices, 
the attempt to do so would be so irritating, and so nearly 
impracticable withal, that I deem it better to forego for the 
time the uses of such offices. 

The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished 
in all parts of the Union. So far as possible, the people 
everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is 
most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course 
here indicated will be followed unless, current events and ex- 
perience shall show a modification or change to be proper, 
and in every case and exigency my best discretion will be 
exercised according to circumstances actually existing, and 
with a view and a hope of a peaceful solution of the national 
troubles and the restoration of fraternal sympathies and af- 
fections. 

That there are persons in one section or another who seek 
to destroy the Union at all events, and are glad of any pre- 
text to do it, I will neither affirm nor deny; but if there be 
such, I need address no word to them. To those, however, 
who really love the Union may I not speak ? 

Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruc- 
tion of our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, 
and its hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely 
why we do it ^. Will you hazard so desperate a step while 
there is any possibility that any portion of the ills you fly 
from have no real existence ? Will you, while the certain 
ills you fly to are greater than all the real ones you fly from — 
will you risk the commission of so fearful a mistake ^ 

All profess to be content in the Union if all constitutional 
rights can be maintained. Is it true, then, that any right, 
plainly written in the Constitution, has been denied ^ I 
think not. Happily the human mind is so constituted that 
no party can reach to the audacity of doing this. Think, 



FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 153 

if you can, of a single instance in which a plainly written 
provision of the Constitution has ever been denied. If by 
the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a 
minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might, 
in a moral point of view, justify revolution — certainly would 
if such a right were a vital one. But such is not our case. 
All the vital rights of minorities and of individuals are so 
plainly assured to them by affirmations and negations, 
guaranties and prohibitions, in the Constitution, that con- 
troversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law 
can ever be framed with a provision specifically applicable 
to every question which may occur in practical administra- 
tion. No foresight can anticipate, nor any document of 
reasonable length contain, express provisions for all possible 
questions. Shall fugitives from labor be surrendered by 
national or by state authority ? The Constitution does not 
expressly say. May Congress prohibit slavery in the terri- 
tories ? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must 
Congress protect slavery in the territories ^ The Constitu- 
tion does not expressly say. 

From questions of this class spring all our constitutional 
controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and 
minorities. If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority 
must, or the government must cease. There is no other 
alternative; for continuing the government is acquiescence 
on one side or the other. 

If a minority in such case will secede rather than acqui- 
esce, they make a precedent which in turn will divide and 
ruin them ; for a minority of their own will secede from them 
whenever a majority refuses to be controlled by such minor- 
ity. For instance, why may not any portion of a new con- 
federacy a year or two hence arbitrarily secede again, pre- 
cisely as portions of the present Union now claim to secede 
from it ? All who cherish disunion sentiments are now being 
educated to the exact temper of doing this. 

Is there such perfect identity of interests among the states 



154 FIRST I N AUGUR J L JDDRESS, 1861 

to compose a new Union, as to produce harmony only, and 
prevent renewed secession ? 

Plainly, the central idea of secession is the essence of 
anarchy. A majority held in restraint by constitutional 
checks and limitations, and always changing easily with 
deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is 
the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects 
it does, of necessity, fly to anarchy or to despotism. Una- 
nimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, as a permanent 
arrangement, is wholly inadmissable ; so that, rejecting the 
majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is 
all that is left. 

I do not forget the position, assumed by some, that con- 
stitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme 
Court; nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding, 
in any case, upon the parties to a suit, as to the object of 
that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect 
and consideration in all parallel cases by all other depart- 
ments of the government. And while it is obviously possible 
that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still 
the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular 
case, with the chance that it may be overruled and never 
become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne 
than could the evils of a diflPerent practice. At the same 
time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of 
the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole 
people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme 
Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation be- 
tween parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased 
to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically 
resigned their government into the hands of that eminent 
tribunal. Nor is there in this view any assault upon the 
court or the judges. It is a duty from which they may not 
shrink to decide cases properly brought before them, and it 
is no fault of theirs if others seek to turn their decisions to 
political purposes. 



FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 155 

One section of our country believes slavery is right, and 
ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong, 
and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial 
dispute. The fugitive-slave clause of the Constitution, and 
the law for the suppression of the foreign slave trade, are 
each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a 
community where the moral sense of the people imperfectly 
supports the law itself. The great body of the people abide 
by the dry legal obligation in both cases, and a few break 
over in each. This, I think, cannot be perfectly cured ; and 
it would be worse in both cases after the separation of the 
sections than before. The foreign slave trade, now imper- 
fectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived, without 
restriction, in one section, while fugitive slaves, now only 
partially surrendered, would not be surrendered at all by 
the other. 

Physically speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot 
remove our respective sections from each other, nor build 
an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife 
may be divorced, and go out of the presence and beyond 
the reach of each other; but the different parts of our coun- 
try cannot do this. They cannot but remain face to face, 
and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue 
between them. Is it possible, then, to make that inter- 
course more advantageous or more satisfactory after separa- 
tion than before ? Can aliens make treaties easier than 
friends can make laws 1 Can treaties be more faithfully 
enforced between aliens than laws can among friends ^. Sup- 
pose you go to war, you cannot fight always ; and when, 
after much loss on both sides, and no gain on either, you 
cease fighting, the identical old questions as to terms of in- 
tercourse are again upon you. 

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people 
who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the 
existing government, they can exercise their constitutional 
right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dis- 



156 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 

member or overthrow it. I cannot be ignorant of the fact 
that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of hav- 
ing the national Constitution amended. While I make no 
recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the 
rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to 
be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instru- 
ment itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, 
favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded 
the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me 
the convention mode seems preferable, in that it allows 
amendments- to originate with the people themselves, instead 
of only permitting them to take or reject propositions orig- 
inated by others not especially chosen for the purpose, and 
which might not be precisely such as they would wish to 
either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amend- 
ment to the Constitution — which amendment, however, 
I have not seen — has passed Congress, to the effect that the 
federal government shall never interfere with the domestic 
institutions of the states, including that of persons held to 
service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I 
depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amend- 
ments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now 
be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being 
made express and irrevocable. 

The chief magistrate derives all his authority from the 
people, and they have conferred none upon him to fix terms 
for the separation of the states. The people themselves 
can do this also if they choose ; but the executive, as such, 
has nothing to do with it. His duty is to administer the 
present government, as it came to his hands, and to transmit 
it, unimpaired by him, to his successor. 

Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ulti- 
mate justice of the people ^. Is there any better or equal 
hope in the world ? In our present differences, is either 
party without faith of being in the right ? If the Almighty 
Ruler of nations, with his eternal truth and justice, be on 



'FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1861 157 

your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth 
and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this 
great tribunal of the. American people. 

By the frame of the government under which we live, 
this same people have wisely given their public servants 
but little power for mischief; and have, with equal wisdom, 
provided for the return of that little to their own hands 
at very short intervals. While the people retain their virtue 
and vigilance, no administration, by any extreme of wicked- 
ness or folly, can very seriously injure the government in 
the short space of four years. 

My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon 
this whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking 
time. If there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste 
to a step which you would never take deliberately, that ob- 
ject will be frustrated by taking time; but no good object 
can be frustrated by it. Such of you as are now dissatisfied 
still have the old Constitution unimpaired, and, on the sen- 
sitive point, the laws of your own framing under it ; while 
the new administration will have no immediate power, if 
it would, to change either. If it were admitted that you 
who are dissatisfied hold the right side in the dispute, there 
still is no single good reason for precipitate action. Intelli- 
gence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him 
who has never yet forsaken this favored land, are still com- 
petent to adjust in the best way all our present difficulty. 

In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and 
not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The 
government will not assail you. You can have no conflict 
without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath 
registered in heaven to destroy the government, while I 
shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and 
defend it." 

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. 
We must not be enemies. Though passion may have 
strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The 



158 SECRETARY SEWARD'S SUGGESTIONS, 1861 

mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle 
field and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone 
all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the 
Union when again touched, as surely they will be, by the 
better angels of our nature. 



SECRETARY SEWARD'S SUGGESTIONS ENTITLED: "SOME 
THOUGHTS FOR THE PRESIDENT'S CONSIDERATION " j 

April I, 1861 

The reply to Secretary Seward's bold suggestion that the executive 
responsibility for the conduct of the civil war be surrendered by the Presi- 
dent to "a member of the cabinet" shows that the new President was ready 
"to put the foot down firmly" as he had said to the New Jersey legislature 
a few weeks earlier. (See p. 144.) The declaration "If this must be done, 
I must do it " leaves no room to doubt President Lincoln's firmness. The 
publication of Seward's "Thoughts for the President's Consideration," and 
Lincoln's reply would probably have brought down upon the secretary's 
head a storm of criticism. We are told by Nicolay and Hay: 

"So far as is known, the affair never reached the knowledge of any 
other member of the Cabinet, or even the most intimate of the President's 
friends; nor was it probably ever again alluded to by either Lincoln or 
Seward. Doubtless it needed only the President's note to show the Secre- 
tary of State how serious a fault he had committed, for all his tireless indus- 
try and undivided influence continued to be given for four long years to his 
chief, not only without reserve, but with a sincere and devoted personal 
attachment." See Nicolay and Hay's "Abraham Lincoln," vol. 3, p. 449. 

First. We are at the end of a month's administration, 
and yet without a policy either domestic or foreign. 

Second. This, however, is not culpable, and it has even 
been unavoidable. The presence of the Senate, with the 
need to meet applications for patronage, have prevented 
attention to other and more grave matters. 

Third. But further delay to adopt and prosecute our 
policies for both domestic and foreign affairs would not only 
bring scandal on the administration, but danger upon the 
country. 

Fourth. To do this we must dismiss the applicants for 



SECRETARY SEWARD'S SUGGESTIONS, iS6i 159 

office. But how ? I suggest that we make the local appoint- 
ments forthwith, leaving foreign or general ones for ulterior 
and occasional action. 

Fifth. The policy at home. I am aware that my views 
are singular, and perhaps not sufficiently explained. My 
system is built upon this idea as a ruling one, namely, that we 
must 

Change the question before the public from one 
UPON SLAVERY, OR ABOUT SLAVERY, for a question upon 

UNION OR DISUNION : 

In other words, from what would be regarded as a party 
question, to one of patriotism or union. 

The occupation or evacuation of Fort Sumter, although 
not in fact a slavery or a party question, is so regarded. 
Witness the temper manifested by the Republicans in the 
free states, and even by the Union men in the South. 

I would therefore terminate it as a safe means for changing 
the issue. I deem it fortunate that the last administration 
created the necessity. 

For the rest, I would simultaneously defend and reenforce 
all the ports in the gulf, and have the navy recalled from for- 
eign stations to be prepared for a blockade. Put the island 
of Key West under martial law. 

This will raise distinctly the question of union or disunion. 
I would maintain every fort and possession in the South. 

For Foreign Nations 

I would demand explanations from Spain and France, 
categorically, at once. 

I would seek explanations from Great Britain and Russia, 
and send agents into Canada, Mexico, and Central America 
to rouse a vigorous continental spirit of independence on 
this continent against European intervention. 

And, if satisfactory explanations are not received from 
Spain and France, 



l6o REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARD, 1861 

Would convene Congress and declare war against them. 

But whatever policy we adopt, there must be an energetic 
prosecution of it. 

For this purpose it must be somebody's business to pursue 
and direct it incessantly. 

Either the President must do it himself, and be all the 
while active in it, or 

Devolve it on some member of his cabinet. Once adopted, 
debates on it must end, and all agree and abide. 

It is not in my especial province; 

But I neither seek to evade nor assume responsibility. 



NOTE IN REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARd's " THOUGHTS" 

Executive Mansion, April i, 1861. 

My dear Sir : Since parting with you I have been con- 
sidering your paper dated this day, and entitled *'Some 
Thoughts for the President's Consideration." The first 
proposition in it is, "First, We are at the end of a month's 
administration, and yet without a policy either domestic or 
foreign." 

At the beginning of that month, in the inaugural, I said : 
"The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, 
and possess the property and places belonging to the govern- 
ment, and to collect the duties and imposts." This had your 
distinct approval at the time ; and, taken in connection with 
the order I immediately gave General Scott, directing him 
to employ ever}^ means in his power to strengthen and hold 
the forts, comprises the exact domestic policy you now urge, 
with the single exception that it does not propose to abandon ,^ 
Fort Sumter. 

Again, I do not perceive how the reenforcement of Fort 
Sumter would be done on a slavery or a party issue, while 
that of Fort Pickens would be on a more national and 
patriotic one. 



REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARD, 1861 161 

The news received yesterday in regard to St. Domingo cer- 
tainly brings a new item within the range of our foreign 
policy ; but up to that time we have been preparing circulars 
and instructions to ministers and the like, all in perfect 
harmony, without even a suggestion that we had no foreign 
policy. 

Upon your closing propositions — that '^whatever policy 
we adopt, there must be an energetic prosecution of it. 

" For this purpose it must be somebody's business to pursue 
and direct it incessantly. 

"Either the President must do it himself, and be all the 
while active in it, or 

"Devolve it on some member of his cabinet. Once 
adopted, debates on it must end, and all agree and abide" — ■ 
I remark that if this must be done, I must do it. When a 
general line of policy is adopted, I apprehend there is no 
danger of its being changed without good reason, or continu- 
ing to be a subject of unnecessary debate; still, upon points 
arising in its progress I wish, and suppose I am entitled to 
have, the advice of all the cabinet. 

Your obedient servant, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO COLONEL ELLSWORTH'S PARENTS 

Colonel Ephraim Elmer Ellsworth commanded a regiment of zouaves 
which he had organized in April, 1861. At Alexandria, Virginia, on May 24, 
1861, where he had been sent with his troops to take possession of Arlington 
Heights overlooking Washington, he pulled down the Confederate flag from 
its staff above the Marshall House and with the flag in his hands was shot 
dead by the owner of the hotel. His body lay in state at the White House 
and later at the city hall in New York. Ellsworth had been a student in 
Lincoln's law office and a member of the party which came on with the 
President-elect to the inauguration. His death was Lincoln's first personal 
loss from the war. See the letter to Mrs. Bixby (p. 210), and to Fanny 
McCullough (p. 183). 



LINCOLN — II 



l62 LETTER TO COL. ELLSWORTH'S PARENTS, 1861 

Washington, D. C, May 25, 1861. 

My dear Sir and Madam : In the untimely loss of your 
noble son, our affliction here is scarcely less than your own. 
So much of promised usefulness to one's country, and of 
bright hopes for one's self and friends, have rarely been so 
suddenly dashed as in his fall. In size, in years, and in 
youthful appearance a boy only, his power to command men 
was surpassingly great. This power, combined with a fine 
intellect, an indomitable energy, and a taste altogether 
military, constituted in him, as seemed to me, the best 
natural talent in that department I ever knew. 

And yet he was singularly modest and deferential in social 
intercourse. My acquaintance with him began less than 
two years ago ; yet through the latter half of the intervening 
period it was as intimate as the disparity of our ages and 
my engrossing engagements would permit. To me he 
appeared to have no indulgences or pastimes ; and I never 
heard him utter a profane or an intemperate word. What 
was conclusive of his good heart, he never forgot his parents. 
The honors he labored for so laudably, and for which in the 
sad end he so gallantly gave his life, he meant for them no 
less than for himself. 

In the hope that it may be no intrusion upon the sacredness 
of your sorrow, I have ventured to address you this tribute 
to the memory of my young friend and your brave and early 
fallen child. 

May God give you that consolation which is beyond all 
earthly power. 

Sincerely your friend in a common affliction, 

A. Lincoln. 



I 



PROCLAMATION, 1861 163 



PROCLAMATION OF A NATIONAL FAST DAY 
August 12, 1861 

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

A Proclamation 

Whereas a joint committee of both houses of Congress 
has waited on the President of the United States and re- 
quested him to "recommend a day of public prayer, humiha- 
tion, and fasting, to be observed by the people of the United 
States with religious solemnities, and the offering of fervent 
supplications to Almighty God for the safety and welfare 
of these states, his blessings on their arms, and a speedy 
restoration of peace" : 

And whereas it is fit and becoming in all people, at all 
times, to acknowledge and revere the supreme government 
of God ; to bow in humble submission to his chastisements; 
to confess and deplore their sins and transgressions, in the 
full conviction that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of 
wisdom ; and to pray with all fervency and contrition for 
the pardon of their past offenses, and for a blessing upon 
their present and prospective action : 

And whereas when our own beloved country, once, by the 
blessing of God, united, prosperous, and happy, is now 
afflicted with faction and civil war, it is peculiarly fit for 
us to recognize the hand of God in this terrible visitation, 
and in sorrowful remembrance of our own faults and crimes 
as a nation and as individuals, to humble ourselves before 
him and to pray for his mercy — to pray that we may be 
spared further punishment, though most justly deserved ; 
that our arms may be blessed and made effectual for the re- 
establishment of law, order, and peace throughout the wide 
extent of our country; and that the inestimable boon of 
civil and religious liberty, earned under his guidance and 



164 LETTER TO MAJOR RAMSEY, 1861 

blessing by the labors and sufferings of our fathers, may be 
restored in all its original excellence : 

Therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United 
States, do appoint the last Thursday in September next as a 
day of humiliation, prayer, and fasting for all the people of 
the nation. And I do earnestly recommend to all the people, 
and especially to all ministers and teachers of religion, of 
all denominations, and to all heads of families, to observe 
and keep that day, according to their several creeds and modes 
of worship, in all humility and with all religious solemnity, 
to the end that the united prayer of the nation may ascend to 
the Throne of Grace, and bring down plentiful blessings upon 
our country. 

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my 
hand and caused the seal of the United States to 
be affixed, this twelfth day of August, a.d. eigh- 
(L. S.) teen hundred and sixty-one, and of the indepen- 
dence of the United States of America the 
eighty-sixth. 

Abraham Lincoln. 

By the President : William H. Seward, 

Secretary of State., 



LETTER TO MAJOR RAMSEY 

October 17, 1861. 

My dear Sir : The lady bearer of this says she has two 
sons who want to work. Set them at it if possible. Wanting 
to work is so rare a want that it should be encouraged. 

Yours truly, 
A. Lincoln. 



MEMORANDUM, 1861 1 65 



MEMORANDUM: SUGGESTIONS TO THE WIDOW OF 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS 

Stephen A. Douglas committed himself unreservedly to the Union when 
the first shot was fired upon Fort Sumter. After a conference with Presi- 
dent Lincoln of several hours' duration he gave out to the newspapers, on 
April 18, 1861, an interview pledging his support to the administration, 
and hurried westward to throw the weight of his vast influence upon the 
Union side. He addressed the Illinois legislature at Springfield and in a 
series of passionate Union speeches rallied his friends and followers every- 
where to the support of the Union cause. He died on June 3, 1861, at 
Chicago. After his death his two boys were frequent visitors at the White 
House, where they received marked attention from the President. 

November 27, 1861. 

Yesterday Mrs. Douglas called, saying she is guardian of 
the minor children of her late husband ; that she is being 
urged, against her inclination, to send them South on the 
plea of avoiding the confiscation of their property there, and 
asking my counsel in the case. 

I expect the United States will overcome the attempt to 
confiscate property because of loyalty to the government; 
but if not, I still do not expect the property of absent minor 
children will be confiscated. I therefore think Mrs. Douglas 
may safely act her pleasure in the premises. 

But it is especially dangerous for my name to be connected 
with the matter, for nothing would more certainly excite 
the secessionists to do the worst they can against the children. 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO MAJOR GENERAL DAVID HUNTER 

In answer to a complaining letter from General Hunter. Lincoln held 
this answer for a month and then sent it by a speciaJ messenger with instruc- 
tions to deliver it only when the General should be in a good humor. The 
last sentence is characteristically epigrammatic. 



l66 LETTER TO GENERAL HUNTER, 1861 

Executive Mansion, Washington, December 31, 1861. 

Dear Sir: Yours of the 23d is received, and I am con- 
strained to say it is difficult to answer so ugly a letter in 
good temper. I am, as you intimate, losing much of the 
great confidence I placed in you, not from any act or omission 
of yours touching the public service, up to the time you were 
sent to Leavenworth, but from the flood of grumbling dis- 
patches and letters I have seen from you since. I knew you 
were being ordered to Leavenworth at the time it was done ; 
and I aver that with as tender a regard for your honor and 
your sensibilities as I had for my own, it never occurred to 
me that you were being "humiliated, insulted, and dis- 
graced !" nor have I, up to this day, heard an intimation 
that you have been wronged, coming from any one but 
yourself. No one has blamed you for the retrograde move- 
ment from Springfield, nor for the information you gave 
General Cameron ; and this you could readily understand, if 
it were not for your unwarranted assumption that the order- 
ing you to Leavenworth must necessarily have been done as a 
punishment for some fault. I thought then, and think yet, 
the position assigned to you is as responsible, and as honorable, 
as that assigned to Buell — I know that General McClellan 
expected more important results from it. My impression 
is that at the time you were assigned to the new Western 
Department, it had not been determined to replace General 
Sherman in Kentucky; but of this I am not certain, because 
the idea that a command in Kentucky was very desirable, and 
one in the farther West undesirable, had never occurred to 
me. You constantly speak of being placed in command of 
only 3000. Now tell me, is this not mere impatience } 
Have you not known all the while that you are to command 
four or five times that many "^ 

I have been, and am sincerely your friend ; and if, as such, 
1 dare to make a suggestion, I would say you are adopting 
the best possible way to ruin yourself. "Act well your part, 



LETTER TO SECRETARY STANTON, 1862 1 67 

there all the honor lies." ^ He who does something at the head 
of one regiment, will eclipse him who does nothing at the head 
of a hundred. 

Your friend, as ever, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO SECRETARY STANTON 

Lincoln was much criticised for exposing himself to the risk of assassina- 
tion. He was enough of a fatahst to believe that he would live to finish 
his work and that precautions would avail little. 

Executive Mansion, January 22, 1862. 

My dear Sir : On reflection I think it will not do, as a 
rule, for the adjutant general to attend me wherever I go: 
not that I have any objection to his presence, but that it 
would be an uncompensating encumbrance both to him and 
me. When it shall occur to me to go anywhere, I wish 
to be free to go at once, and not to have to notify the adjutant 
general and wait till he can get ready. 

It is better, too, for the public service that he shall give 
his time to the business of his office, and not to personal 
attendance on me. 

While I thank you for the kindness of the suggestion, my 
view of the matter is as I have stated. 

Yours truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



SPEECH TO THE TWELFTH INDIANA VOLUNTEERS 

May 15, 1862 

This regiment, under the command of Col. William H. Link was about 
to be mustered out of the service at the end of its enlistment. The Presi- 
dent's desire was to have as many of the men reenlist as possible. Hence 
the speech. 

^ From Pope's " Essay on Man." 



l68 SPEECH TO INDIANA VOLUNTEERS, 1862 

Soldiers of the Twelfth Indiana Regiment: It has 
not been customary heretofore, nor will it be hereafter, 
for me to say something to every regiment passing in review. 
It occurs too frequently for me to have speeches ready on 
all occasions. As you have paid such a mark of respect to 
the Chief Magistrate, it appears that I should say a word or 
two in reply. 

Your Colonel has thought fit, on his own account and in 
your name, to say that you are satisfied with the manner in 
which I have performed my part in the difficulties which 
have surrounded the nation. For your kind expressions 
I am extremely grateful, but, on the other hand, I assure 
you that the nation is more indebted to you, and such as 
you, than to me. It is upon the brave hearts and strong 
arms of the people of the country that our reliance has been 
placed in support of free government and free institutions. 

For the part which you and the brave army of which you 
are a part have, under Providence, performed in this great 
struggle, I tender more thanks — greatest thanks that can 
possibly be due — and especially to this regiment, which has 
been the subject of good report. The thanks of the nation 
will follow you, and may God's blessing rest upon you 
now and forever. I hope that upon your return to your 
homes you will find your friends and loved ones well and 
happy. . I bid you farewell. 

LETTER TO REVERDY JOHNSON 

Reverdy Johnson was a Maryland lawyer of distinction. He had been 
associated with Lincoln and Stanton, the Secretary of War, in an important 
lawsuit in Cincinnati some years before. His public career had been a 
brilliant one and was to continue so, for after having served as member of 
the Peace Congress of 1861, he became Attorney-General of the United States, 
U. S. Senator, and Ambassador to Great Britain. The letter is one of many 
in this collection which show the difficulties President Lincoln had in satis- 
fying his critics. Lincoln's firmness is well expressed in the last sentence. 
The "very excellent Union senator" referred to is probably Mr. Johnson 
himself, who was elected to the United States Senate in 1862. 



LETTER TO REVERDY JOHNSON, 1862 169 

(Private.) 

Executive Mansion, Washington, July 26, 1862. 

My dear Sir: Yours of the i6th, by the hand of Governor 
Shepley, is receiVed. It seems the Union feehng in Louisiana 
is being crushed out by the course of General Phelps. Please 
pardon me for believing that is a false pretense. The people 
of Louisiana — all intelligent people everywhere — know 
full well that I never had a wish to touch the foundations 
of their society, or any right of theirs. With perfect knowl- 
edge of this they forced a necessity upon me to send armies 
among them, and it is their own fault, not mine, that they 
are annoyed by the presence of General Phelps. They also 
know the remedy — know how to be cured of General Phelps. 
Remove the necessity for his presence. And might it not be 
well for them to consider whether they have not already 
had time enough to do this ? If they can conceive of any- 
thing worse than General Phelps within my power, would 
they not better be looking out for it ? They very well know 
the way to avert all this is simply to take their place in the 
Union upon the old terms. If they will not do this, should 
they not receive harder blows rather than lighter ones .? 
You are ready to say I apply to friends what is due only to 
enemies. I distrust the wisdom if not the sincerity of friends 
who would hold my hands while my enemies stab me. This 
appeal of professed friends has paralyzed me more in this 
struggle than any other one thing. You remember telling 
me, the day after the Baltimore mob in April, 1861, that it 
would crush all Union feeling in Maryland for me to attempt 
bringing troops over Maryland soil to Washington. I 
brought the troops notwithstanding, and yet there was 
Union feeling enough left to elect a legislature the next 
autumn, which in turn elected a very excellent Union United 
States senator ! I am a patient man — always willing to 
forgive on the Christian terms of repentance, and also to 
give ample time for repentance. Still, I must save this 



I/O LETTER TO CUTHBERT BULLITT, 1862 

government, if possible. What I cannot do, of course I 
will not do, but it may as well be understood, once for all, 
that I shall not surrender this game leaving any available 
card unplayed. 

Yours truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO CUTHBERT BULLITT , 

There is no better example of Lincoln's use of a homely colloquial illus- 
tration than in the query, "Would you drop the war where it is, or would 
you prosecute it in future with elder-stalk squirts charged with rose water ?" 

(Private) 

Washington, D. C, Jul}^ 28, 1862. 

Sir : The copy of a letter addressed to yourself by Mr. 
Thomas J. Durant ^ has been shown to me. The writer 
appears to be an able, a dispassionate, and an entirely sincere 
man. The first part of the letter is devoted to an effort to 
show that the secession ordinance of Louisiana was adopted 
against the will of a majority of the people. This is probably 
true, and in that fact may be found some instruction. Why 
did they allow the ordinance to go into effect .? Why did 
they not assert themselves } Why stand passive and allow 
themselves to be trodden down by a minority ? Why did 
they not hold popular meetings and have a convention of 
their own to express and enforce the true sentiment of the 
state ? If preorganization was against them then, why not 
do this now that the United States army is present to protect 
them ? The paralysis — the dead palsy — of the govern- 
ment in this whole struggle is, that this class of men will 
do nothing for the government, nothing for themselves, 

1 Thomas Jefferson Durant, lawyer and politician, born Philadelphia. 
1817. Practiced law at New Orleans, U. S. District Attorney for Louisiana 
and Attorney-General of the state. 



LETTER TO CUTHBERT BULLITT, 1862 171 

except demanding that the government shall not strike its 
open enemies lest they be struck by accident ! . . . 

I am not posted to speak understandingly on all the police 
regulations of which Mr. Durant complains. If experience 
shows any one of them to be wrong, let them be set right. I 
think I can perceive in the freedom of trade which Mr. 
Durant urges that he would relieve both friends and enemies 
from the pressure of the blockade. By this he would serve 
the enemy more effectively than the enemy is able to serve 
himself. I do not say or believe that to serve the enemy is 
the purpose of Mr. Durant, or that he is conscious of any 
purpose other than national and patriotic ones. Still, if 
there were a class of men who, having no choice of sides in 
the contest, were anxious only to have quiet and comfort 
for themselves while it rages, and to fall in with the victorious 
side at the end of it without loss to themselves, their advice 
as to the mode of conducting the contest would be precisely 
such as his is. He speaks of no duty — apparently thinks of 
none — resting upon Union men. He even thinks it injurious 
to the Union cause that they should be restrained in trade 
and passage without taking sides. They are to touch neither 
a sail nor a pump, but to be merely passengers — deadheads 
at that — to be carried snug and dry throughout the storm, 
and safely landed right side up. Nay, more : even a 
mutineer is to go untouched, lest these sacred passengers 
receive an accidental wound. Of course the rebellion will 
never be suppressed in Louisiana if the professed Union 
men there will neither help to do it nor permit the govern- 
ment to do*it without their help. Now, I think the true 
remedy is very different from that suggested by Mr. Durant. 
It does not lie in rounding the rough angles of the war, but 
in removing the necessity for the war. The people of 
Louisiana who wish protection to person and property, have 
but to reach forth their hands and take it. Let them in 
good faith reinaugurate the national authority, and set up a 
state government conforming thereto under the Constitution. 



172 LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY, 1862 

They know how to do it, and can have the protection of the 
army while doing it. The army will be withdrawn as soon 
as such government can dispense with its presence, and the 
people of the state can then, upon the old constitutional 
terms, govern themselves to their own liking. This is very 
simple and easy. 

If they will not do this — if they prefer to hazard all for the 
sake of destroying the government, it is for them to consider 
whether it is probable I will surrender the government to 
save them from losing all. If they decline what I suggest, 
you scarcely need to ask what I will do. 

What would you do in my position ? Would you drop 
the war where it is, or would you prosecute it in future with 
elder-stalk squirts charged with rose water } Would you 
deal lighter blows rather than heavier ones .? Would you 
give up the contest, leaving any available means unap- 
plied ^ 

I am in no boastful mood. I shall not do more than I can ; 
and I shall do all I can to save the government, which is my 
sworn duty as well as my personal inclination. I shall do 
nothing in malice. What I deal with is too vast for malicious 
dealing. 



LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY 

Horace Greeley, then editor of the New York Tribune, was one of the 
greatest of American journalists. He was brilliant, but erratic, and his 
enthusiasms often led him to say and do unwise things. In 1861 he had 
favored allowing the Southern states to secede. As the Civil War progressed 
the movement of events was too slow to satisfy his impatient demands, and 
he published daily editorials under the headline "On to Richmond," in 
which he urged a more vigorous prosecution of the war than the condition 
of the Union army made possible. On August 19, 1862, he printed in the 
Tribuyie his sensational "Prayer of Twenty Millions of People," which 
charged Lincoln with being too much under the influence of the slave power. 
This letter, elicited by Greeley's savage attacks, is one of the best examples 
of Lincoln's genius for direct statement. 



LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY, 1862 ly^ 

Executive Mansion, Washington, August 22, 1862. 

Dear Sir: I have just read yours of the 19th instant, 
addressed to myself through the Nezu York Tribune. If 
there be in it any statements or assumptions of fact which I 
may know to be erroneous, I do not now and here controvert 
them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to 
be falsely drawn, I do not now and here argue against them. 
If there be perceptible in it an impatient and dictatorial 
tone, I waive it, in deference to an old friend whose heart 
I have always supposed to be right. 

As to the policy I *'seem to be pursuing," as you say, I 
have not meant to leave any one in doubt. 

I would save the Union. I would save it in the shortest 
way under the Constitution. The sooner the national 
authority can oe restored, the nearer the Union will be 
"the Union as it was." If there be those who would not 
save the Union unless they could at the same time save 
slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who 
would not save the Union unless they could at the same time 
destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount 
object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either 
to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union 
without freeing any slave, I would do it ; if I could save it 
by freeing all the slaves, I would do it ; and if I could save 
it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do 
that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do 
because I believe it helps to save the Union ; and what I 
forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help 
to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe 
that what I am doing hurts the cause; and I shall do more 
whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I 
shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors, and I 
shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be 
true views. 

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of 



174 MEDITATION ON THE WILL OF GOD, 1S62 

official duty, and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed 
personal wish that all men everywhere could be free. 

Yours, 

A. Lincoln. 



MEDITATION ON THE WILL OF GOD 

September, 1862 

The will of God prevails. In great contests each party 
claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may 
be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against 
the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war 
it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different 
from the purpose of either party ; and 3^et the human instru- 
mentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adapta- 
tion to effect his purpose. I am almost ready to say that 
this is probably true ; that God wills this contest, and wills 
that it shall not end yet. By his mere great power on the 
minds of the now contestants, he could have either saved or 
destroyed the Union without a human contest. Yet the 
contest began. And, having begun, he could give the final 
victory to either side any day. Yet the contest proceeds. 

TELEGRAM TO MAJOR GENERAL McCLELLAN 

October 24, 1862 

General George B. McClellan, in command of the Union armies, had 
disappointed the President by his inactivity. He was criticised just at this 
time for not following up his partial victory over the Confederate army at 
Antietam by pursuing the enemy and reaping the fruit of the victory. The 
President had been tried almost to the limit of his endurance by McClellan's 
delays until on one occasion he expressed the wish that he might borrow 
McClellan's army from him, and on another he said: "I would cheerfully 
stand and hold McClellan's horse for him if he would only give us a vic- 
tory. 

I have just read your dispatch about sore-tongued and 
fatigued horses. Will you pardon me for asking what the 



ORDER FOR SUNDAY OBSERVANCE, 1862 175 

horses of your army have done since the battle of Antietam 
that fatigues anything ? 

A. Lincoln. 



ORDER FOR SUNDAY OBSERVANCE 

November 15, 1862 

The President, commander in chief of the army and navy, 
desires and enjoins the orderly observance of the Sabbath 
by the officers and men in the military and naval service. 
The importance for man and beast of the prescribed weekly 
rest, the sacred rights of Christian soldiers and sailors, a 
becoming deference to the best sentiment of a Christian 
people, and a due regard for the Divine will, demand that 
Sunday labor in the army and navy be reduced to the measure 
of strict necessity. The discipHne and character of the 
national forces should not suffer, nor the cause they defend 
be imperiled, by the profanation of the day or name of the 
Most High. "At this time of public distress" — adopting 
the words of Washington in 1776 — "men may find enough 
to do in the service of God and their country without aban- 
doning themselves to vice and immorality." The first gen- 
eral order issued by the Father of his Country after the 
Declaration of Independence indicates the spirit in which our 
institutions were founded and should ever be defended. 
"The general hopes and trusts that every officer and man 
will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, 
defending the dearest rights and Hberties of his country." 

Abraham Lincoln. 



LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ 

Carl Schurz, at this time brigadier general, had written the President 
to express the widespread anxiety which had grown out of rumors of dis- 
loyalty in the army. Lincoln followed up this answer — which is one of a 



/ 



176 LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ, 1862 

very few expressions of his impatience or discouragement in existence — by 
inviting General Schurz to come to Washington and talk it over. Schurz's 
account of the intervievv is interesting. 

"He greeted me cordially as of old and bade me pull up a chair and sit 
by his side. Then he brought his large hand with a slap down on my knee 
and said with a smile: 'Now tell me, young man, whether you really think 
that I am as poor a fellow as you have made me out in your letter!' I 
must confess, this reception disconcerted me. I looked into his face and felt 
something like a big lump in my throat. After a while I gathered up my 
wits and after a word of sorrow, if I had written anything that could have 
pained him, I explained to him my impressions of the situation and my 
reasons for writing to him as I had done. He listened with silent attention 
and when I stopped, said very seriously : 'Well, I know that you are a warm 
antislavery man and a good friend to me. Now let me tell you all about it.' 
Then he unfolded in his peculiar way his view of the then existing state of 
affairs, his hopes and his apprehensions, his troubles and embarrassments, 
making m^ny quaint remarks about men and things. I regret I cannot 
remember all. Then he described how the criticisms coming down upon 
him from all sides chafed him, and how my letter, although containing some 
points that were well-founded and useful, had touched him as a terse sum- 
ming up of all the principal criticisms and offered him a good chance at me 
for a reply. Then slapping my knee again, he broke out in a loud laugh and 
exclaimed: 'Didn't I give it to you hard in my letter } Didn't I } But it 
didn't hurt, did it } I did not mean to, and therefore I wanted you to come 
so quickly.' He laughed again and seemed to enjoy the matter heartily. 
'Well,' he added, 'I guess we understand one another now, and it's all 
right.' When after a conversation of more than an hour I left him, I 
asked whether he still wished that I should write to him. 'Why, certainly,' 
he answered; 'write me whenever the spirit moves you.' We parted as 
better friends than ever." [See " Reminiscences of Carl Schurz." N. Y., 
1908.] 

Schurz had a conspicuous public career. There is no better estimate of 
Lincoln's character than in Schurz's classic monograph. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, November 24, 1862. 

My dear Sir: I have just received and read your letter 
of the 20th. The purport of it is that we lost the late elec- 
tions and the administration is failing because the war is 
unsuccessful, and that I must not flatter myself that I am 
not justly to blame for it. I certainly know that if the war 
fails, the administration fails, and that I will be blamed for 



« 



LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ, 1862 1 77 

it, whether I deserve it or not. And I ought to be blamed if 
I could do better. You think I could do better; therefore 
you blame me already. I think I could not do better; 
therefore I blame you for blaming me. I understand you 
now to be willing to accept the help of men who are not 
Republicans, provided they have " heart in it." Agreed. 
I want no others. But who is to be the judge of hearts, or 
of "heart in it" ? If I must discard my own judgment and 
take yours, I must also take that of others ; and by the time 
I should reject all I should be advised to reject, I should have 
none left, RepubHcans or others — not even yourself. For 
be assured, my dear sir, there are men who have *' heart in 
it" that think you are performing your part as poorly as you 
think I am performing mine. I certainly have been dis- 
satisfied with the slowness of Buell and McClellan ; but before 
I relieved them I had great fears I should not find successors 
to them who would do better; and I am sorry to add that 
I have seen little since to relieve those fears. 

I do not clearly see the prospect of any more rapid move- 
ments. I fear we shall at last find out that the diflBculty is 
in our case rather than in particular generals. I wish to 
disparage no one — certainly not those who sympathize 
with me; but I must say I need success more than I need 
sympathy, and that I have not seen the so much greater 
evidence of getting success from my sympathizers than from 
those who are denounced as the contrary. It does seem to 
me that in the field the two classes have been very much alike 
in what they have done and what they have failed to do. 
In sealing their faith with their blood. Baker and Lyon and 
Bohlen and Richardson, Republicans, did all that men could 
do; but did they any more than Kearny and Stevens and 
Reno and Mansfield, none of whom were Republicans, and 
some at least of whom have been bitterly and repeatedly 
denounced to me as secession sympathizers ^. I will not 
perform the ungrateful task of comparing cases of failure. 

In answer to your question, "Has it not been publicly 

LINCOLN 12 



178 ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 

stated in the newspapers, and apparently proved as a fact, 
that from the commencement of the war the enemy was 
continually supplied with information by some of the con- 
fidential subordinates of as important an officer as Adjutant 
General Thomas ?" I must say ''No," as far as my knowl- 
edge extends. And I add that if you can give any tangible 
evidence upon the subject, I will thank you to come to this 
city and do so. Very truly your friend, 

A. Lincoln. 



FROM THE ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER i, 1862, 
RECOMMENDING COMPENSATED EMANCIPATION 

Lincoln's earnest appeal for a solution of the difficulties presented by 
the slavery question and the Civil War by buying the slaves with the pro- 
ceeds of a government bond issue was by no means a new idea. It was the 
British plan in the West Indies, many years before. Lincoln had introduced 
a bill in Congress on January 16, 1849, providing for compensated emanci- 
pation in the District of Columbia. In his Peoria speech, on October 16, 
1854, he had said: "It was frequently spoken of by members of Congress 
and by citizens of Washington six years ago; and I heard no one express a 
doubt that a sj^stem of gradual emancipation, with compensation to owners, 
would meet the approbation of a large majority of the white people of 
the District. But without the action of Congress they could say nothing; 
and Congress said no." 

Note Lincoln's modesty where he says: "Nor do I forget that some of 
you are my seniors, nor that many of you have more experience than I in 
the conduct of public affairs. Yet I trust that, in view of the great respon- 
sibility resting upon me, you will perceive no want of respect to yourselves 
in any undue earnestness I may seem to display." At least one sentence 
in this message is of the same high quality as the Gettysburg address: "We 
shall nobly save or meanly lose the last, best hope of earth." 

. . . On the 22d of September last a proclamation was 
issued by the Executive, a copy of which is herewith sub- 
mitted. In accordance with the purpose expressed in the 
second paragraph of that paper, I now respectfully recall 
your attention to what may be called "compensated eman- 
cipation." 



ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 1 79 

A nation may be said to consist of its territory, its people, 
and its laws. The territory is the only part which is of cer- 
tain durability. "One generation passeth away and another 
generation cometh, but the earth abideth forever." It is 
of the first importance to duly consider and estimate this 
ever enduring part. That portion of the earth's surface 
which is owned and inhabited by the people of the United 
States is well adapted to be the home of one national family, 
and it is not well adapted for two or more. Its vast extent 
and its variety of climate and productions are of advantage 
in this age for one people, whatever they might have been 
in former ages. . . . 

There is no line, straight or crooked, suitable for a national 
boundary, upon which to divide. Trace through from east 
to west upon the line between the free and the slave country, 
and we shall find a little more than one third of its length 
are rivers, easy to be crossed, and populated, or soon to be 
populated, thickly upon both sides ; while nearly all its re- 
maining length are merely surveyors' lines, over which people 
may walk back and forth without any consciousness of their 
presence. No part of this line can be made any more difficult 
to pass, by writing it down on paper or parchment as a 
national boundary. The fact of separation, if it comes, gives 
up, on the part of the seceding section, the fugitive-slave 
clause, along with all other constitutional obligations upon 
the section seceded from, while I should expect no treaty 
stipulation would be ever made to take its place. 

But there is another difficulty. The great interior region 
bounded east by the Alleghenies, north by the British do- 
minions, west by the Rocky Mountains, and south by the 
line along which the culture of corn and cotton meets, . . . 
alread}^ has above ten millions of people, and will have fifty 
millions within fifty years, if not prevented by any political 
folly or mistake. It contains more than one third of the 
country owned by the United States — certainly more than 
one million of square miles. Once half as populous as 



l8o ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 

Massachusetts alread}^ is, it would have more than seventy- 
five milHons of people. A glance at the map shows that, 
territorially speaking, it is the great body of the republic. 
The other parts are but marginal borders to it, the mag- 
nificent region sloping west from the Rocky Mountains 
to the Pacific being the deepest, and also the richest, in 
undeveloped resources. In the production of provisions, 
grains, grasses, and all which proceed from them, this great 
interior region is naturally one of the most important in the 
world. Ascertain from the statistics the small proportion 
of the region which has, as yet, been brought into cultivation, 
and also the large and rapidly increasing amount of its prod- 
ucts, and we shall be overwhelmed with the magnitude of 
the prospect presented. And yet this region has no sea-coast, 
touches no ocean anywhere. As part of one nation, its people 
now find, and may forever find, their way to Europe by New 
York, to South America and Africa by New Orleans, and 
to Asia by San Francisco. But separate our common country 
into two nations, as designed by the present rebellion, and 
every man of this great interior region is thereby cut oflF from 
some one or more of these outlets — not perhaps by a physical 
barrier, but by embarrassing and onerous trade regulations. 
And this is true, wherever a dividing or boundary line may 
be fixed. Place it between the now free and slave country, or 
place it south of Kentucky, or north of Ohio, and still the 
truth remains that none south of it can trade to any port 
or place north of it, and none north of it can trade to any 
port or place south of it, except upon terms dictated by a 
government foreign to them. These outlets, east, west, and 
south, are indispensable to the well-being of the people 
inhabiting, and to inhabit, this vast interior region. Which 
of the three may be the best, is no proper question. All 
are better than either; and all of right belong to that people 
and their successors forever. True to themselves, they will 
not ask where a line of separation shall be, but will vow rather 
that there shall be no such line. Nor are the marginal regions 



ANNUAL MESSAGE OF DECEMBER, 1862 181 

less interested in these communications to and through them 
to the great outside world. They too, and each of them, must 
have access to this Egypt of the west, without paying toll 
at the crossing of any national boundary. 

Our national strife springs not from our permanent part, 
not from the land we inhabit, not from our national home- 
stead. There is no possible severing of this but would mul- 
tiply and not mitigate evils among us. In all its adapta- 
tions and aptitudes it demands union and abhors separation. 
In fact it would ere long force reunion, however much of 
blood and treasure the separation might have cost. 

Our strife pertains to ourselves — to the passing genera- 
tions of men ; and it cannot without convulsion be hushed 
forever with the passing of one generation. 

I do not forget the gravity which should characterize a 
paper addressed to the Congress of the nation by the Chief 
Magistrate of the nation. Nor do I forget that some of you 
are my seniors, nor that many of you have more experience 
than I in the conduct of public affairs. Yet I trust that in 
view of the great responsibility resting upon me you- will 
perceive no want of respect to yourselves in any undue 
earnestness I may seem to display. 

Is it doubted, then, that the plan I propose, if adopted, 
would shorten the war and thus lessen its expenditure of 
money and of blood ? Is it doubted that it would restore the 
national authority and national prosperity, and perpetuate 
both indefinitely } Is it doubted that we here — Congress and 
Executive — can secure its adoption ? Will not the good 
people respond to a united and earnest appeal from us ^. Can 
we, can they, by any other means so certainly or so speedily 
assure these vital objects ? We can succeed only by concert. 
It is not ''Can any of us imagine better V but "Can we all do 
better V^ Object whatsoever is possible, still the question 
occurs, "Can we do better.?" The dogmas of the quiet 
past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion 



1 82 LETTER TO ARMY OF THE POTOMAC, 1862 

Is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occa- 
sion.^ As our case is new, so we must think anew and act 
anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall 
save our country. 

Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this 
Congress and this Administration will be remembered in spite 
of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can 
spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which 
we pass will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest 
generation. We say we are for the Union. The world will 
not forget that we say this. We know how to save the 
Union. The world knows we do know how to save it. We — 
even we here — hold the power and bear the responsibility. 
In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the 
free — honorable alike in what we give and what we pre- 
serve. We shall nobly save or meanly lose the last, best hope 
of earth. Other means may succeed ; this could not fail. 
The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just — a way which, if 
followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must 
forever bless. 



LETTER OF THANKS TO THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC, 
AFTER THE DEFEAT AT FREDERICKSBURG 

It was the President's constant thought for the soldiers and his sympa- 
thetic understanding of their hardships, as evidenced by this letter and 
many others of the kind, that gave him their personal loyalty in such a 
remarkable degree. So it was that they came to know him as their "Father 
Abraham." 

December 22, 1862. 

To THE Army of the Potomac : I have just read your 

commanding general's report of the battle of Fredericksburg. 

Although you were not successful, the attempt was not an 

error, nor the failure other than accident. The courage with 

^ Shakespearean — "King John," Act II, Scene i. 



LETTER TO MISS FANNY McCULLOUGH, 1S62 183 

which you, in an open field, maintained the contest against 
an intrenched foe, and the consummate skill and success 
with which you crossed and recrossed the river in the face of 
the enemy, show that you possess all the qualities of a great 
army, which will yet give victory to the cause of the country 
and of popular government. 

Condoling with the mourners for the dead, and sympa- 
thizing with the severely wounded, I congratulate you that 
the number of both is comparatively so small. 

I tender to you, officers and soldiers, the thanks of the 
nation. 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO MISS FANNY McCULLOUGH 

December 23, 1862. 

Dear Fanny : It is with deep regret that I learn of the 
death of your kind and brave father, and especially that it is 
affecting your young heart beyond what is common in such 
cases. In this sad world of ours sorrow comes to all, and to 
the young it comes with bittered agony because it takes them 
unawares. The older have learned ever to expect it. I am 
anxious to afford some alleviation of your present distress. 
Perfect relief is not possible except with time. You cannot 
now realize that you will ever feel better. Is not this so ? 
And yet it is a mistake. You are sure to be happy again. 
To know this, which is certainly true, will make you some 
less miserable now. I have had experience enough to know 
what I say, and you need only to believe it to feel better at 
once. The memory of your dear father, instead of an agony, 
will yet be a sad, sweet feeling in your heart, of a purer and 
holier sort than you have known before. 

Please present my kind regards to your afflicted mother. 

Your sincere friend, 

A. Lincoln. 



1 84 EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, 1863 

EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION 
January i, 1863 

In submitting to his cabinet the preliminary proclamation of emancipation 
during the summer of 1862, Lincoln made this explanation: "When the 
rebel army was at Frederick I determined as soon as it should be driven out 
of Maryland to issue a proclamation of emancipation. I said nothing to 
any one; but I made the promise to myself, and" — hesitating — " to my 
Maker. The rebel army is now driven out and I am going to fulfill that 
promise." Secretary Seward advised withholding the proclamation until the 
next Union victory, and it was accordingly not made public until September 
22, 1862, immediately following the battle of Antietam. The invocation of 
Divine favor with which the proclamation closes was written by Secretary 
Chase. 

The effect of the proclamation was felt most strongly abroad where public 
sentiment was hostile to slavery. Lincoln had wisely waited until this, 
the crowning act of his administration, could be done without seriously 
alienating the support of the states of Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri. 
Two days after its promulgation in September the governors of the Northern 
states met at Altoona and sent an address to the President : "We hail with 
heartfelt gratitude and encouraged hope the proclamation." The recep- 
tion was generally favorable, although General McClellan reported some ex- 
pressions of dissatisfaction among the troops under his command. 

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: 

A Proclamation 

Whereas, on the twenty-second day of September, in the 
year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, 
a proclamation was issued by the President of the United 
States, containing, among other things, the following, to 
wit : 

*'That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord 
one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held 
as slaves within any state, or designated part of a state, the 
people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the. United 
States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and 
the Executive Government of the United States, including the 
military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and 



EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, 1863 1 85 

maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or 
acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts 
they may make for their actual freedom. 

"That the Executive will, on the first day of January 
aforesaid, by proclamation, designate the states and parts 
of states, if any, in which the people thereof respectively 
shall then be in rebellion against the United States; and 
the fact that any state, or the people thereof, shall on that 
day be in good faith represented in the Congress of the United 
States by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a 
majority of the qualified voters of such state shall have par- 
ticipated, shall in the absence of strong countervailing 
testimony be deemed conclusive evidence that such state 
and the people thereof are not then in rebellion against the 
United States." 

Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the 
United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as com- 
mander in chief of the army and navy of the United States, 
in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and 
government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary 
war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first 
day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight 
hundred and sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose 
so to do, publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred 
days from the day first above mentioned, order and designate 
as the states and parts of states wherein the people thereof, 
respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United 
States, the following, to wit : 

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana (except the parishes of St. 
Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, 
St. James, Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, 
St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the city of 
New Orleans), Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, 
South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia (except the 
forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the 
counties of Berkeley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, 



1 86 LETTER TO MANCHESTER WORKINGMEN, 1863 

York, Princess Anne, and Norfolk, including the cities of Nor- 
folk and Portsmouth), and which excepted parts are for the 
present left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued. 

And by virtue of the power and for the purpose aforesaid, 
I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within 
said designated states and parts of states are, and hence- 
forward shall be, free; and that the Executive Government 
of the United States, including the military and naval 
authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom 
of said persons. 

And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be free 
to abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defense; 
and I recommend to them that, in all cases when allowed, they 
labor faithfully for reasonable wages. 

And I further declare and make known that such persons 
of suitable condition will be received into the armed service 
of the United States to garrison forts, positions, stations, and 
other places, and to man vessels of all sorts in said service. 

And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of 
justice, warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity, 
I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the 
gracious favor of Almighty God. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and 
caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. 

Done at the city of Washington, this first day 
of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand 
(L. S.) eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the inde- 
pendence of the United States of America the 

eighty-seventh. . t 

Abraham Lincoln. 

By the President : William H. Seward, Secretary of State. 

LETTER TO THE WORKINGMEN OF MANCHESTER, 

ENGLAND 

In Manchester and wherever else in England labor in the cotton mills 
was the chief industry, the prosecution of the American war and the conse- 



LETTER TO MANCHESTER WORKINGMEN, 1S63 187 

quent cutting off of the cotton supply from the European markets had thrown 
thousands out of employment and caused great suffering among the working 
people. This condition was being used by the English sympathizers with the 
South to force the British government to a recognition of the Confederacy. 
John Bright, the greatest English democrat of his generation, was in that 
crisis the staunch friend of the Lincoln administration. The mass meeting 
of six thousand workingmen held in Manchester on New Year's eve to 
celebrate the emancipation proclamation was a remarkable demonstration of 
heroism on the part of men whose livelihood seemed to depend upon the 
success of the Confederate government and who were yet ready to lend their 
moral support to the Union because they believed human slavery should be 
abolished. On January 30, 1863, John Bright wrote to Senator Charles 
Sumner: "I think in every town in the kingdom, a public meeting would 
go by an overwhelming majority in favor of President Lincoln and of the 
North." In this connection read the addresses of Henry Ward Beecher in 
1863 at Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, and Liverpool. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, January 19, 1863. 

To THE Workingmen of Manchester : I have the honor 
to acknowledge the receipt of the address and resolutions 
which you sent me on the eve of the new year. When I 
came, on the 4th of March, 1861, through a free and con- 
stitutional election to preside in the government of the 
United States, the country was found at the verge of civil 
war. Whatever might have been the cause, or whosesoever 
the fault, one duty, paramount to all others, was before me, 
namely, to maintain and preserve at once the Constitution 
and the integrity of the federal republic. A conscientious 
purpose to perform this duty is the key to all the measures 
of administration which have been and to all which will 
hereafter be pursued. Under our frame of government and 
my official oath, I could not depart from this purpose if I 
would. It is not always in the power of governments to 
enlarge or restrict the scope of moral results which follow the 
policies that they may deem it necessary for the public safety 
from time to time to adopt. 

I have understood well that the duty of self-preservation 
rests solely with the American people ; but I have at the 
same time been aware that favor or disfavor of foreign 



l88 LETTER TO MANCHESTER WORKINGMEN, 1863 

nations might have a material influence in enlarging or pro- 
longing the struggle with disloyal men in which the country- 
is engaged. A fair examination of history has served to 
authorize a belief that the past actions and influences of the 
United States were generally regarded as having been bene- 
ficial toward mankind. I have, therefore, reckoned upon 
the forbearance of nations. Circumstances — to some of 
which you kindly allude — induce me especially to expect 
that if justice and good faith should be practiced by the 
United States, they would encounter no hostile influence 
on the part of Great Britain. It is now a pleasant duty to 
acknowledge the demonstration you have given of your 
desire that a spirit of amity and peace toward this country 
may prevail in the councils of your Queen, who is respected 
and esteemed in your own country only more than she is 
by the kindred nation which has its home on this side of the 
Atlantic. 

I know and deeply deplore the suff"erings which the work- 
ingmen at Manchester, and in all Europe, are called to endure 
in this crisis. It has been often and studiously represented 
that the attempt to overthrow this government, which was 
built upon the foundation of human rights, and to substitute 
for it one which should rest exclusively on the basis of human 
slavery, was likely to obtain the favor of Europe. Through 
the action of our disloyal citizens, the workingmen of Europe 
have been subjected to severe trials, for the purpose of forcing 
their sanction to that attempt. Under the circumstances, 
1 cannot but regard your decisive utterances upon the ques- 
tion as an instance of sublime Christian heroism which has 
not been surpassed in any age or in any country. It is 
indeed an energetic and reinspiring assurance of the inherent 
power of truth, and of the ultimate and universal triumph 
of justice, humanity, and freedom. I do not doubt that the 
sentiments you have expressed will be sustained by your 
great nation ; and, on the other hand, I have no hesitation 
in assuring you that they will excite admiration, esteem, and 



LETTER TO GENERAL HOOKER, 1863 1 89 

the most reciprocal feelings of friendship among the American 
people. I hail this interchange of sentiment, therefore, as an 
augury that whatever else may happen, whatever misfortunes 
may befall your country or my own, the peace and friendship 
which now exist between the two nations will be, as it shall 
be my desire to make them, perpetual. 

Abraham Lincoln. 



LETTER TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER 

It was because he was known as "Fighting Joe" that Lincoln felt con- 
strained to warn him to "beware of rashness." That the President had 
other reasons to fear the success of Hooker's command is clear from this 
letter. The tone of the army was low, and public confidence regarding the 
loyalty of the troops had been severely shaken. This was quickly remedied 
when Hooker took command. That the letter was received in the spirit 
the writer hoped for was proved when Hooker said : "That is just such a 
letterasafather might write to a son. . . . Although I think he was harder 
on me than I deserved, I will say that I love the man who wrote it." 

Executive Mansion, Washington, D. C, January 26, 1863. 

General : I have placed you at the head of the Army of 
the Potomac. Of course I have done this upon what appear 
to me to be sufficient reasons, and yet I think it best for 
you to know that there are some things in regard to which I 
am not quite satisfied with you. I believe you to be a brave 
and skillful soldier, which of course I like. I also beheve 
you do not mix politics with your profession, in which you 
are right. You have confidence in yourself, which is a val- 
uable if not an indispensable quality. You are ambitious, 
which, within reasonable bounds, does good rather than 
harm; but I think that during General Burnside's command 
of the army you have taken counsel of your ambition and 
thwarted him as much as you could, in which you did a great 
wrong to the country and to a most meritorious and hon- 
orable brother officer. I have heard, in such a way as to 
believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the 



I 



190 LETTER TO GENERAL ROSECRANS, 1863 

government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, 
but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only 
those generals who gain successes can set up dictators. 
What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk 
the dictatorship. The government will support you to the 
utmost of its ability, which is neither more nor less than it 
has done and will do for all commanders. I much fear that 
the spirit which you have aided to infuse into the army, of 
criticising their commander and withholding confidence from 
him, will now turn upon you. I shall assist you as far as I 
can to put it down. Neither you nor Napoleon, if he were 
alive again, could get any good out of an army while such a 
spirit prevails in it; and now beware of rashness. Beware 
of rashness, but with energy and sleepless vigilance go forward 
and give us victories. 

Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO GENERAL WILLIAM S. ROSECRANS 

Brigadier General W. S. Rosecrans was at this time in command of the 
Army of the Cumberland. For his brilliant services at the battle of Stone 
River he was long afterwards brevetted major general in the regular army. 
After the Civil War he held many important civil positions, among them, 
member of Congress, minister to Mexico, and register of the treasury. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, March 17, 1863. 

My dear Sir : I have just received your telegram saying 
that the "Secretary of War telegraphed after the battle of 
Stone River, 'Anything you and your command want you 
can have,'" and then specifying several things you have 
requested and have not received. 

The promise of the Secretary, as you state it, is certainly 
pretty broad, nevertheless it accords with the feeling of the 
whole government here toward you. I know not a single 
enemy of yours here. Still the promise must have a rea- 



I 



LETTER TO GENERAL ROSECRJNS, 1S63 191 

sonable construction. We know you will not purposely 
make an unreasonable request, nor persist in one after it 
shall appear to be such. Now, as to the matter of a pay- 
master, you desired one to be permanently attached to your 
army, and, as I understand, desired that Major Larned 
should be the man. This was denied you ; and you seem to 
think it was denied partly to disoblige you and partly to 
disoblige Major Larned — the latter, as you suspect, at the 
instance of Paymaster-General Andrews. On the con- 
trary, the Secretary of War assures me the request was 
refused on no personal ground whatever, but because to 
grant it would derange, and substantially break up, the whole 
pay system as now organized, and so organized on very full 
consideration and sound reason, as believed. There is power- 
ful temptation in money; and it was and is believed that 
nothing can prevent the paymasters speculating upon the 
soldiers but a system by which each is to pay certain regiments 
so soon after he has notice that he is to pay those particular 
regiments that he has no time or opportunity to lay plans 
for speculating upon them. This precaution is all lost if 
paymasters respectively are to serve permanently with the 
same regiments, and pay them over and over during the 
war. No special application of this has been intended to 
be made to Major Larned or to your army. And as to 
General Andrews, I have in another connection felt a little 
aggrieved at what seemed to be his implicit following the 
advice and suggestions of Major Larned — so ready are 
we all to cry out and ascribe motives when our own toes 
are pinched. 

Now as to your request that your commission should date 
from December, 1861. Of course you expected to gain 
something by this; but you should remember that precisely 
so much as you should gain by it others would lose by it. 
If the thing you sought had been exclusively ours, we would 
have given it cheerfully ; but, being the right of other men, 
we having a merely arbitrary power over it, the taking it 



192 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL HOOKER, 1863 

from them and giving it to you became a delicate matter 
and more deserving of consideration. Truth to speak, I 
do not appreciate this matter of rank on paper as you officers \ 
do. The world will not forget that you fought the battle of; 
Stone River, and it will never care a fig whether you rank 
General Grant on paper, or he so ranks you. 

As to the appointment of an aide contrary to your wishes, 
I knew nothing of it until I received your dispatch ; and 
the Secretary of War tells me he has known nothing of 
it, but will trace it out. The examination of course will 
extend to the case of R. S. Thomas, whom you say you wish 
appointed. 

And now be assured you wrong both yourself and us when 
you even suspect there is not the best disposition on the part 
of us all here to oblige you. 

Yours very truly, 
' . A. Lincoln. 



TELEGRAM TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER, JUNE 10, 1863 

The last sentence, "If he stays where he is, fret him and fret him," is 
prophetic of the method by which General Grant nearly two years later 
overwhelmed Lee and forced his surrender at Appomattox. 

Major General Hooker : Your long dispatch of to-day 
is just received. If left to me I would not go south of the 
Rappahannock upon Lee's moving north of it. If you had 
Richmond invested to-day you would not be able to take it 
in twenty days ; meanwhile your communications, and with 
them your army, would be ruined. I think Lee's army, and 
not Richmond, is your true objective point. If he comes 
toward the upper Potomac, follow on his flank and on his 
inside track, shortening your Hnes while he lengthens his. 
Fight him, too, when opportunity offers. If he stays where 
he is, fret him and fret him. 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT, 1S63 193 

TELEGRAM TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER 
A characteristic dispatch in Lincoln's colloquial style. 

Washington, June 14, 1863, 5.50 p.m. 

Major General Hooker : So far as we can make out 
here, the enemy have Milroy surrounded at Winchester, and 
Tyler at Martinsburg. If they could hold out a few days, 
could you help them ? If the head of Lee's army is at 
Martinsburg and the tail of it on the plank road between 
Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, the animal must be 
very slim somewhere. Could you not break him ? 

A. Lincoln. 

LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT 

"I now wish to make the personal acknowledgment that you were right 
and I was wrong." Lincoln's ability to make this confession is one proof 
of his greatness. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, July 13, 1863. 

My dear General : I do not remember that you and 
I ever met personally. I write this now as a grateful acknowl- 
edgment for the almost inestimable service you have done 
the country. I wish to say a word further. When you 
first reached the vicinity of Vicksburg, I thought you should 
do what you finally did — march the troops across the neck, 
run the batteries with the transports, and thus go below; 
and I never had any faith, except a general hope that vou 
knew better than I, that the Yazoo Pass expedition and the 
like could succeed. When you got below and took Port 
Gibson, Grand Gulf, and vicinity, I thought you should 
go down the river and join General Banks, and when you 
turned northward, east of the Big Black, I feared it was a 
mistake. I now wish to make the personal acknowledgment 
that you were right and I was wrong. 

Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 

LINCOLN 13 



194 LETTER TO MRS. LINCOLN, 1863 

FROM A LETTER TO MRS. LINCOLN 

Executive Mansion, Washington, August 8, 1863. 

My dear Wife : All as well as usual, and no particular 
trouble anyway. I put the money into the Treasury at 
five per cent, with the privilege of withdrawing it any time 
upon thirty days' notice. I suppose you are glad to learn 
this. Tell dear Tad poor "Nanny Goat" is lost, and Mrs. 
Cuthbert and I are in distress about it. The day you left, 
Nanny was found resting herself and chewing her little cud 
on the middle of Tad's bed ; but now she's gone ! The 
gardener kept complaining that she destroyed the flowers, 
till it was concluded to bring her down to the White House. 
This was done, and the second day she had disappeared and 
has not been heard of since. This is the last we know of poor 
"Nanny." . . . 

LETTER TO JAMES H. HACKETT 

Lincoln was embarrassed by Hackett's publication of this letter and 
by the savage comment which it evoked from the New York Herald, but j 
wrote again: "I have not been much shocked by the newspaper com- jj 
ments upon it. . . . I have endured a great deal of ridicule without much J 
malice; and have received a great deal of kindness, not quite free from j 
ridicule." I 

As far back as 1833, at New Salem, Lincoln had been a close student of * 
Shakespeare. John Hay, his private secretary and biographer, says of hif 
life in the White House: "He would there read Shakespeare for hours witl 
a single secretary for audience. The plays he most affected were " Hamlet/ 
"Macbeth," and the series of histories; among these he never tired o 
" Richard the Second." The terrible outburst of grief and despair int( 
which Richard falls in the third act had a peculiar fascination for him. 
I have heard him read it at Springfield, at the White House, and at the 
Soldiers' Home. He read Shakespeare more than all other writers together." 
"Addresses of John Hay," p. 334. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, August 17, 1863. 
My DEAR Sir : Months ago I should have acknowledged 



LETTER TO J. H. UACKETT, 1S63 195 

the receipt of your book and accompanying kind note ; 
and I now have to beg your pardon for not having done so. 

For one of my age I have seen very httle of the drama. 
The first presentation of FalstafF I ever saw was yours here, 
last winter or spring. Perhaps the best compHment I can 
pay is to say, as I truly can, I am very anxious to see it 
again. Some of Shakespeare's plays I have never read ; while 
others I have gone over perhaps as frequently as any unpro- 
fessional reader. Among the latter are " Lear," " Richard 
III," " Henry VIII," " Hamlet," and especially " Macbeth." 
I think nothing equals " Macbeth." It is wonderful. 

Unlike you gentlemen of the profession, I think the 
soHloquyin " Hamlet" commencing "Oh, my offense is rank," 
surpasses that commencing "To be or not to be." But 
pardon this small attempt at criticism. I should hke to hear 
you pronounce the opening speech of Richard III. Will 
you not soon visit Washington again ^. If you do, please 
call and let me make your personal acquaintance. 

Yours trul}^ 
A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO JAMES C. CONKLING 

Lincoln called this his "stump speech." It was sent to Mr. Conkling, a 
.Springfield lawyer, with the request that Mr. Conkling himself read it 
before the mass convention of "Unconditional Union" men at Springfield. 
Mr. Conkling had been a member of the Illinois legislature and of the first 
>tate central committee of the Republican party and a presidential elector 
n i860. As presidential elector for Illinois, he voted for Lincoln's reelec- 
tion in 1864. 

Lincoln was justly proud of this letter. It is one of the best examples 
of his skill in argument, and it had remarkable effect in allaying the dis- 
content of those who opposed the emancipation of the slaves. There are 
many strong sentences in it. For example: "The Father of Waters again 
goes unvexed to the sea," and "And then there will be some black men who 
can remember that with silent tongue, and clenched teeth, and steady eye, 
and well-poised bayonet, they have helped mankind on to this great consum- 
mation, while I fear there will be some white ones unable to forget that with 
malignant heart and deceitful speech they strove to hinder it." 



196 LETTER TO J. C. CON KLIN G, 1863 

Lincoln's accompanying note read in part: "You are one of the best 
public readers. I have but one suggestion — read it very slowly. And now 
God bless you and all good Union men," 

Executive Mansion, Washington, August 26, 1863. 

My dear Sir : Your letter inviting me to attend a mass 
meeting of Unconditional Union men, to be held at the capital 
of Illinois on the third day of September, has been received. 
It would be very agreeable to me to thus meet my old friends 
at my own home, but I cannot just now be absent from here 
so long as a visit there would require. 

The meeting is to be of all those who maintain uncondi- 
tional devotion to the Union ; and I am sure my old political 
friends will thank me for tendering, as I do, the nation's 
gratitude to those and other noble men whom no partisan 
malice or partisan hope can make false to the nation's life. 

There are those who are dissatisfied with me. To such 
I would say : You desire peace, and you blame me that we 
do not have it. But how can we attain it ^ There are but 
three conceivable ways. First, to suppress the rebellion by 
force of arms. This I am trying to do. Are you for it .? 
If you are, so far we are agreed. If you are not for it, a 
second way is to give up the Union. I am against this. 
Are you for it 1 If you are, you should say so plainly. If 
you are not for force, nor yet for dissolution, there only 
remains some imaginable compromise. I do not believe 
any compromise embracing the maintenance of the Union 
is now possible. All I learn leads to a directly opposite belief. 
The strength of the rebellion is its military, its army. That 
army dominates all the country and all the people within 
its range. Any offer of terms made by any man or men 
within that range, in opposition to that army, is simply 
nothing for the present, because such man or men have no 
power whatever to enforce their side of a compromise, if one 
were made with them. 

To illustrate : Suppose refugees from the South and peace 



LETTER TO J. C. CONKLINGy 1863 197 

men of the North get together in convention, and frame and 
proclaim a compromise embracing a restoration of the Union. 
In what way can that compromise be used to keep Lee's 
army out of Pennsylvania ? Meade's army can keep Lee's 
out of Pennsylvania, and, I think, can ultimately drive it 
out of existence. But no paper compromise, to which the 
controllers of Lee's army are not agreed, can at all affect 
that army. In an effort at such compromise we should waste 
time which the enemy would improve to our disadvantage; 
and that would be all. A compromise, to be effective, must 
be made either with those who control the rebel army, or 
with the people first liberated from the domination of that 
army by the success of our own army. Now, allow me to 
assure you that no word or intimation from that rebel army, 
or from any of the men controlling it, in relation to any peace 
compromise, has ever come to my knowledge or belief. All 
charges and insinuations to the contrary are deceptive and 
groundless. And I promise you that if any such proposition 
shall hereafter come, it shall not be rejected and kept a secret 
from you. I freely acknowledge myself the servant of the 
people, according to the bond of service — the United States 
Constitution — and that, as such, I am responsible to them. 

But to be plain. You are dissatisfied with me about the 
negro. Quite likely there is a difference of opinion between 
you and myself upon that subject. I certainly wish that all 
men could be free, while I suppose you do not. Yet I have 
neither adopted nor proposed any measure which is not con- 
sistent with even your views, provided you are for the Union. 
I suggested compensated emancipation, to which you replied, 
you wished not to be taxed to buy negroes. But I had not 
asked you to be taxed to buy negroes, except in such way as 
to save you from greater taxation to save the Union ex- 
clusively by other means. 

You dislike the Emancipation Proclamation, and perhaps 
would have it retracted. You say it is unconstitutional. 
I think differently. I think the Constitution invests its 



198 LETTER TO J. C. CONKLING, 1863 

commander in chief with the law of war in time of war. 
The most that can be said — if so much — is that slaves are 
property. Is there — has there ever been — any question that, 
by the law of war, property, both of enemies and friends, 
may be taken when needed ? And is it not needed whenever 
taking it helps us or hurts the enemy ? Armies the world 
over destroy enemies' property when they cannot use it, 
and even destroy their own to keep it from the enemy. 
Civilized belligerents do all in their power to help themselves 
or hurt the enemy, except a few things regarded as barbarous 
or cruel. Among the exceptions are the massacre of van- 
quished foes and noncombatants, male and female. 

But the proclamation, as law, either is valid or is not 
valid. If it is not valid, it needs no retraction. If it is 
valid, it cannot be retracted any more than the dead can 
be brought to life. Some of you profess to think its retraction 
would operate favorably for the Union. Why better after the 
retraction than before the issue ? There was more than a 
year and a half of trial to suppress the rebellion before the 
proclamation issued, the last one hundred days of which 
passed under an explicit notice that it was coming, unless 
averted by those in revolt returning to their allegiance. The 
war has certainly progressed as favorably for us since the issue 
of the proclamation as before. I know, as fully as one can 
know the opinions of others, that some of the commanders of 
our armies in the field who have given us our most important 
successes, believe the emancipation policy and the use of 
colored troops constitute the heaviest blow yet dealt to the 
rebellion, and that at least one of these important successes 
could not have been achieved when it was, but for the aid of 
black soldiers. Among the commanders holding these views 
are some who have never had any affinity with what is called 
Abolitionism or with Republican party politics, but who hold 
them purely as military opinions. I submit these opinions 
as being entitled to some weight against the objections often 
urged, that emancipation and arming the blacks are unwise 



LETTER TO J. C. CONKLING, 1863 199 

as military measures, and were not adopted as such in good 
faith. 

You say you will not fight to free negroes. Some of them 
seem willing to fight for you ; but no matter. Fight you, 
then, exclusively to save the Union. I issued the proclama- 
tion on purpose to aid you in saving the Union. Whenever 
you shall have conquered all resistance to the Union, if I 
shall urge you to continue fighting, it will be an apt time 
then for you to declare you will not fight to free negroes. 

I thought that in your struggles for the Union, to whatever 
extent the negroes should cease helping the enemy, to that 
extent it weakened the enemy in his resistance to you. Do 
you think differently .? I thought that whatever negroes 
could be got to do as soldiers leaves just so much less for 
white soldiers to do in saving the Union. Does it appear 
otherwise to you ? But negroes, like other people, act upon 
motives. Why should they do anything for us, if we will 
do nothing for them } If they stake their lives for us, they 
must be prompted by the strongest motive, even the promise 
of freedom. And the promise being made, must be kept. 

The signs look better. The Father of Waters again goes 
unvexed to the sea. Thanks to the great Northwest for it. 
Nor yet wholly to them. Three hundred miles up they 
met New England, Empire, Keystone, and Jersey hewing 
their way right and left. The sunny South, too, in more 
colors than one, also lent a hand. On the spot, their part of 
the history was jotted down in black and white. The job 
was a great national one, and let none be banned who bore 
an honorable part in it. And while those who have cleared 
the great river may well be proud, even that is not all. It is 
hard to say that anything has been more bravely and well 
done than at Antietam, Murfreesboro, Gettysburg, and on 
many fields of lesser note. Nor must Uncle Sam's web-feet 
be forgotten. At all the watery margins they have been 
present. Not only on the deep sea, the broad bay, and the 
rapid river, but also up the narrow, muddy bayou, and 



zoo MEMORANDUM, 1863 

wherever the ground was a Httle damp, they have been and 
made their tracks. Thanks to all — for the great Republic — 
for the principle it lives by and keeps alive — for man's vast 
future — thanks to all. 

Peace does not appear so distant as it did. I hope it 
will come soon, and come to stay ; and so come as to be worth 
the keeping in all future time. It will then have been proved 
that among freemen there can be no successful appeal from 
the ballot to the bullet, and that they who take such appeal 
are sure to lose their case and pay the cost. And then there 
will be some black men who can remember that with silent 
tongue, and clenched teeth, and steady eye, and well-poised 
bayonet, they have helped mankind on to this great con- 
summation, while I fear there will be some white ones unable , 
to forget that with malignant heart and deceitful speech they 
strove to hinder it. 

Still, let us not be over-sanguine of a speedy, final triumph. 

Let us be quite sober. Let us diligently apply the means, 

never doubting that a just God, in His own good time, will 

give us the rightful result. ^r , 

Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 

MEMORANDUM 
September 26, 1863 

This was indorsed on a military document, immediately after the battle 
of Chickamauga. It is an interesting memorandum, because it shows 
Lincoln's mental curiosity and his leaning toward an interest in things 
occult. It is here published for the first time. 

A curious coincidence occurred in the relieving of General 
Negley — to wit, that the Secretary's order relieving him, 
and Gen. Foster's request to have him relieved were simul- 
taneous, and independent of each other. I do not know 
what Foster's reason was; but I understand Stanton's to be 
that Negley was disinclined to raise colored troops, and 
Mr. S. wanted some one who would take to it more heartily. 

A. Lincoln, Sept. 26, 1863. 



GETTYSBURG ADDRESS, 1863 201 

ADDRESS AT THE DEDICATION OF THE NATIONAL 
CEMETERY AT GETTYSBURG 

November 19, 1863 

The Gettysburg address was delivered in response to an invitation given to 
the President on November second to " set apart the cemetery grounds to their 
sacred use by a few appropriate remarks." The oration of the day was by 
Edward Everett and was two hours long. Lincoln had thought out what he 
was to say and at the last committed the address to paper, writing the con- 
cluding sentences in pencil after he reached Gettysburg. He read it slowly 
from two sheets of paper, making slight changes in the form of expression 
as he read, and showing deep feeling when he came to the words: "The 
world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never 
forget what they did here." An audience of perhaps a hundred thousand, 
after standing through a program of four hours' duration, listened to hrs 
speech and felt disappointed that it was so short. The words "under God" 
in the last sentence were not in the original draft, but were spoken under 
the solemn impulse of the occasion. One who was present has given us 
this description: "The tall form of the President appeared on the stand and 
never before have I seen a crowd so vast and restless, after standing so long, 
so soon stilled and quieted. Hats were removed and all stood motionless to 
catch the first words he should utter, and as he slowly, clearly, and without 
the least sign of embarrassment read and spoke, you could not mistake the 
feeling and sentiment of the vast multitude before him." Another: "It 
seemed to me I had never seen any other human being who was so stately, 
and, I may say, majestic, and yet benignant. His features had a sad, 
mournful, almost haggard, and still hopeful expression." 

To Everett's note of praise for the thoughts expressed "with such elo- 
quent simplicity and appropriateness," Lincoln replied: "In our respective 
parts yesterday you could not have been excused to make a short address, 
nor I a long one. I am pleased to know that in your judgment the little I 
did say was not a failure." For accounts of the occasion, see "The Gettys- 
burg Address," by Maj. William H. Lambert; "Recollections of Lincoln," 
by Gen. James Grant Wilson in Putnam's Magazine for February, 1909; 
"History of the Battle of Gettysburg," by Samuel P. Bates; "Two Visits 
to Gettysburg," Scribner's Magazine, ]u[y, 1893 ; "Lincoln at Gettysburg," 
an Address, Clark E. Carr, Chicago, 1906. 

Fourscore and seven 3^ears ago, our fathers brought forth 
on this continent a new nation, conceived in Hberty, and 
dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. 

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether 



202 J D DRESS TO GENERAL GRANT, 1864 

that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, 
can long endure. We are met on a great battle field of that 
war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as 
a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that 
that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper 
that we should do this. 

But in a larger sense we cannot dedicate — we cannot con- 
secrate — we cannot hallow — this ground. The brave men, 
living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it 
far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will 
little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can 
never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, 
rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which 
they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It 
is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remain- 
ing before us — that from these honored dead we take in- 
creased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last 
full measure of devotion ; that we here highly resolve that 
these dead shall not have died in vain ; that this nation, under 
God, shall have a new birth of freedom ; and that govern- 
ment of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not 
perish from the earth. 

ADDRESS TO GENERAL GRANT 

March 9, 1864 

Grant was summoned to Washington as soon as he received his appoint- 
ment as Lieutenant General. It was his first visit to the capital since the 
beginning of the war. He attended a reception at the White House in the 
evening and received such an ovation that he had to seek shelter behind a 
sofa to escape the crowd. It was the first time that Grant and Lincoln 
had met. The commission was delivered at noon on the next day, in the 
presence of the Cabinet and a few other men. The President then made 
the little speech which follows. Later, some one asked Lincoln's im- 
pression of Grant and he answered : " I hardly know what to think of 
him. He's the quietest little fellow you ever saw." 

General Grant : The nation's appreciation of what you 
have done, and its reliance upon you for what remains to do, 



ADDRESS AT SANITARY FAIR, 1864 203 

in the existing great struggle, are now presented with this 
commission, constituting you Lieutenant General in the 
Army of the United States. 

With this high honor devolves upon you also a correspond- 
ing responsibility. As the country herein trusts you, so, 
under God, it will sustain you. I scarcely need add, that 
with what I here speak for the nation, goes my own hearty 
personal concurrence. 



ADDRESS ON CLOSING THE SANITARY FAIR 

Washington, March 18, 1864 

This was one of a number of great fairs held from time to time during 
the war to raise money with which to provide for the comfort and happi- 
ness of the soldiers at the front and in the hospitals. The Christian Sani- 
tary Commission, which managed these affairs, was organized everywhere in 
the North and, largely through the efforts of the women, earned and spent 
millions of dollars in aid of the soldiers. 

I appear to say but a word. This extraordinary war in 
which we are engaged falls heavily upon all classes of people, 
but the most heavily upon the soldier. For it has been said, 
"all that a man hath will he give for his life"; and while 
all contribute of their substance, the soldier puts his Hfe at 
stake, and often yields it up in his country's cause. The 
\ highest merit, then, is due to the soldier. 

In this extraordinary war extraordinary developments 
have manifested themselves, such as have not been seen in 
former wars ; and amongst these manifestations nothing 
has been more remarkable than these fairs for the relief of 
suffering soldiers and their families. And the chief agents 
in these fairs are the women of America. 

I am not accustomed to the language of eulogy. I have 
never studied the art of paying compliments to women. 
But I must say, that if all that has been said by orators and 
poets since the creation of the world in praise of women 
were applied to the women of America, it would not do them 



204 LETTER TO A. G. HODGES, 1864 

justice for their conduct during this war. I will close by 
saying, God bless the women of America ! 



LETTER TO ALBERT G. HODGES 

This letter is Lincoln's expansion of the central thought in his letter 
to Horace Greeley (p. 172) that emancipation was a war measure justified 
under the Constitution by indispensable necessity. The most significant 
sentence as indicating Lincoln's own judgment of himself — for Lincoln 
was singularly averse to self-exploitation — is "I claim not to have con- 
trolled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me." The 
final sentence is his first written expression of what was to be the dominant 
thought in the second inaugural address. A comparison of this sentence 
with its exquisite expanded form in the inaugural affords a profitable study 
of Lincoln's ability to enrich the expression of a great thought by restate- 
ment. The passage to be compared begins "The Almighty has his own 
purposes" and closes with "The judgments of the Lord are true and 
righteous altogether" (p. 216). 

Colonel Albert Gallatin Hodges was for many years state printer of Ken- 
tucky. He was at this time editor of The Commonwealth at Frankfort, Ky., 
originally a Whig paper, then Know-nothing, and during the Civil War a 
Union publication. This letterwas called forth by an interview with Colonel 
Hodges, Governor Bramlette, and Archibald Dixon, who protested against 
the enrollment of negro soldiers, but were persuaded by President Lincoln to 
consent whenever Kentucky should fail to furnish her quota of white men. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, April 4, 1864. 

My dear Sir : You ask me to put in writing the sub- 
stance of what I verbally said the other day in your pres- 
ence, to Governor Bramlette and Senator Dixon. It was 
about as follows : 

"I am naturally antislavery. If slavery is not wrong, 
nothing is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so 
think and feel, and yet I have never understood that the 
presidency conferred upon me an unrestricted right to act 
officially upon this judgment and feeling. It was in the 
oath that I took, that I would, to the best of my ability, 
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United 
States. I could not take the office without taking the oath. 



LETTER TO A. G. HODGES, 1864 205 

Nor was it my view that I might take an oath to get power, 
and break the oath in using the power. I understood, too, 
that in ordinary civil administration this oath even forbade 
me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment on 
the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this 
many times and in many ways. And I aver that, to this day, 
I have done no official act in mere deference to my abstract 
feeling and judgment on slavery. I did understand, how- 
ever, that my oath to preserve the Constitution to the best 
of my ability imposed upon me the duty of preserving, by 
every indispensable means, that government — that nation, 
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it 
possible to lose the nation and yet preserve the Constitution ^ 
By general law, life and limb must be protected, yet often 
a limb must be amputated to save a life ; but a life is never 
wisely given to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise 
unconstitutional, might become lawful by becoming indis- 
pensable to the preservation of the Constitution through 
the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I assumed 
this ground,' and now avow it. I could not feel that, to the 
best of my ability, I had even tried to preserve the Constitu- 
tion, if, to save slavery or any minor matter, I should permit 
the wreck of government, country, and Constitution, al- 
together. When, early in the war. General Fremont at- 
tempted military emancipation, I forbade it, because I 
did not then think it an indispensable necessity. When, a 
little later. General Cameron, then Secretary of War, sug- 
gested the arming of the blacks, I objected, because I did 
not think it an indispensable necessity. When, still later, 
General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I again 
forbade it, because I did not yet think the indispensable 
necessity had come. When, in March and May and July, 
1862, I made earnest and successive appeals to the border 
states to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the 
indispensable necessity for military emancipation and 
arming the blacks would come, unless averted by that 



206 LETTER TO A. G. HODGES, 1864 

measure. They declined the proposition, and I was, in my 
best judgment, driven to the alternative of either surrender- 
ing the Union, and with it the Constitution, or laying strong 
hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In 
choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss ; but of this I 
was not entirely confident. More than a year of trial now 
shows no loss by it in our foreign relations, none in our 
home popular sentiment, none in our white military force — 
no loss by it anyhow or anywhere. On the contrary, it 
shows a gain of quite one hundred and thirty thousand 
soldiers, seamen, and laborers. These are palpable facts, 
about which, as facts, there can be no caviling. We have 
the men, and we could not have had them without the 
measure. 

"And now let any Union man who complains of the 
measure, test himself by writing down in one line that he is 
for subduing the rebellion by force of arms ; and in the next 
that he is for taking these hundred and thirty thousand 
men from the Union side, and placing them where they 
would be but for the measure he condemns. If he cannot 
face his case so stated, it is only because he cannot face the 
truth." 

I add a word which was not in the verbal conversation. 
In telling this tale, I attempt no compliment to my own 
sagacity. I claim not to have controlled events, but confess 
plainly that events have controlled me. Now, at the end 
of three years' struggle, the nation's condition is not what 
either party, or any man, devised or expected. God alone 
can claim it. Whither it is tending seems plain. If God 
now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that 
we of the North, as well as you of the South, shall pay 
fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history 
will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice 
and goodness of God. 

Yours truly, 

A. Lincoln. 



LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT, 1S64 207 

TELEGRAM TO MRS. LINCOLN 

April 28, 1864. 
Mrs. a. Lincoln, New York. 

The draft will go to you. Tell Tad the goats and father 
are very well, especially the goats. 

A. Lincoln. 

LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 

Executive Mansion, Washington, April 30, 1864. 

Lieutenant General Grant : Not expecting to see you 
again before the spring campaign opens, I wish to express 
in this way my entire satisfaction with what you have done 
up to this time, so far as I understand it. The particulars 
of your plans I neither know nor seek to know. You are 
vigilant and self-reliant; and, pleased with this, I wish not 
to obtrude any constraints or restraints upon you. While 
I am very anxious that any great disaster or capture of our 
men in great numbers shall be avoided, I know these points 
are less likely to escape your attention than they would be 
mine. If there is anything wanting which is within my power 
to give, do not fail to let me know it. And now, with a 
brave army and a just cause, may God sustain you. 

Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 

SPEECH IN RESPONSE TO A DELEGATION FROM THE 
NATIONAL UNION LEAGUE 
June 9, 1864 

President Lincoln was renominated by a convention of all "those desiring 
the maintenance of the Union, the supremacy of the Constitution, and the 
vigorous prosecution of the war," held at Baltimore on June 8, 1864. Dis- 
satisfied radicals had held a Republican convention at Cleveland a week 
earlier to prevent Lincoln's nomination or to defeat him in the election; 
but they adjourned without accomplishing anything. This opposition was 



208 SPEECH ACCEPTING SECOND NOMINATION, 1864 

led by Horace Greeley, General John C. Fremont, and Secretary Salmon P. 
Chase. The nomination at Baltimore was unanimous. Lincoln's modesty 
in the little speech becomes almost humility. He refused to let the dignity 
of his place deter him from employing the simple and homely western figure 
of speech in the last sentence, and this quaint conclusion was greeted by his 
audience with prolonged laughter and applause. 

Gentlemen : I can only say in response to the kind re- 
marks of your chairman, as I suppose, that I am very grateful 
for the renewed confidence which has been accorded to me 
both by the convention and by the National League. I am 
not insensible at all to the personal compliment there is in 
this, and yet I do not allow myself to believe that any but 
a small portion of it is to be appropriated as a personal com- 
pliment. That really the convention and the Union League 
assembled with a higher view — that of taking care of the 
interests of the country for the present and the great future — 
and that the part I am entitled to appropriate as a compli- 
ment is only that part which I may lay hold of as being the 
opinion of the convention and of the League, that I am not 
entirely unworthy to be intrusted with the place which 
I have occupied for the last three years. But I do not allow 
myself to suppose that either the convention or the League 
have concluded to decide that I am either the greatest or 
best man in America, but rather they have concluded that it 
is not best to swap horses while crossing the river, and have 
further concluded that I am not so poor a horse that they 
might not make a botch of it in trying to swap. 

TELEGRAM TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 

August 17, 1864. 

Lieutenant General Grant, City Point, Va. : I have 
seen your dispatch expressing your unwillingness to break 
your hold where you are. Neither am I willing. Hold on 
with a bulldog grip, and chew and choke as much as possible. 

A. Lincoln. 



SPEECH TO THE i66th OHIO VOLUNTEERS, 1864 209 
FROM A SPEECH TO THE i66th OHIO VOLUNTEERS 

August 22, 1864 

Lincoln's hold on the common people is explained by his willingness to say 
in all simplicity such things as "I happen, temporarily, to occupy this White 
House. I am a living witness that any one of your children may look to 
come here as my father's child has." 

Soldiers : . . . I almost always feel inclined, when I 
happen to say anything to soldiers, to impress upon them, in 
a few brief remarks, the importance of success in this contest. 
It is not merely for to-day, but for all time to come, that we 
should perpetuate for our children's children that great 
and free government which we have enjoyed all our lives. 
I beg you to remember this, not merely for my sake, but for 
yours. I happen, temporarily, to occupy this White House. 
I am a living witness that any one of your children may look 
to come here as my father's child has. It is in order that 
each one of you may have, through this free government 
which we have enjoyed, an open field and a fair chance for 
your industry, enterprise, and intelligence ; that you may all 
have equal privileges in the race of hfe, with all its desirable 
human aspirations. It is for this the struggle should be 
maintained, that we may not lose our birthright — not only 
for one, but for two or three years. The nation is worth 
fighting for, to secure such an inestimable jewel. 

MEMORANDUM 

August 23, 1864 

The President wrote this depressing memorandum and carefully sealed 
it, and, without disclosing its contents, asked each member of the cabinet to 
indorse his signature upon it. In November, 1864, after a triumphant 
reelection, he asked Secretary Hay to open it, and Lincoln then read it 
aloud at the cabinet meeting. See "Abraham Lincoln, A History," by 
Nicolay and Hay, vol. IX, p. 251. 

This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly 
probable that this administration will not be reelected. 

LINCOLN — 14 



2IO LETTER TO MRS. BIX BY, 1S64 

Then it will be my duty to so cooperate with the President- 
elect as to save the Union between the election and the in- 
auguration ; as he will have secured his election on such 
ground that he cannot possibly save it afterward. 

A. Lincoln. 



FROM A RESPONSE TO A SERENADE 

November 9, 1864 

... I am thankful to God for this approval of the 
people ; but while deeply grateful for this mark of their 
confidence in me, if I know my heart, my gratitude is free 
from any taint of personal triumph. I do not impugn the 
motives of any one opposed to me. It is no pleasure to me to 
triumph over any one, but I give thanks to the Almighty 
for this evidence of the people's resolution to stand by free 
government and the rights of humanity. 



LETTER TO MRS. BIXBY 

This letter, the two inaugural addresses, the Springfield farewell, and the 
Gettysburg address are considered by the critics to be the best examples a 
of the purity and power of Lincoln's literary style. 'i| 

Executive Mansion, Washington, November 21, 1864. 

Dear Madam : I have been shown in the files of the War 
Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massa- 
chusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died 
gloriously on the field of battle. I feel how weak and 
fruitless must be any words of mine which should attempt to 
beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I 
cannot refrain from tendering to you the consolation that may 
be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save. 
I pray that our heavenly Father may assuage the anguish 
of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished 



LETTER TO DEACON PHILLIPS, 1864 211 

memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that 
must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar 
of freedom. 

Yours very sincerely and respectfully, 

Abraham Lincoln. 



LETTER TO DEACON JOHN PHILLIPS 

Deacon John Phillips, Sturbridge, Massachusetts, who had voted at every 
presidential election since 1789, was at this time 104 years old. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, November 21, 1864. 

My dear Sir : I have heard of the incident at the polls 
in your town, in which you acted so honorable a part, and 
I take the liberty of writing to you to express my personal 
gratitude for the compliment paid me by the suffrage of a 
citizen so venerable. 

The example of such devotion to civic duties in one whose 
days have already been extended an average lifetime beyond 
the Psalmist's limit, cannot but be valuable and fruitful. 
It is not for myself only, but for the country which you 
have in your sphere served so long and so well, that I thank 
you. 

Your friend and servant, 

Abraham Lincoln. 



MEMORANDUM 

December 3, 1864 

On Thursday of last week, two ladies from Tennessee came 
before the President, asking the release of their husbands 
held as prisoners of war at Johnson's Island. They were 
put off until Friday, when they came again, and were again 
put off until Saturday. At each of the interviews one of 
the ladies urged that her husband was a religious man, and 
on Saturday the President ordered the release of the pris- 



212 LETTER TO GENERAL SHERMAN, 1864 

oners, when he said to this lady : "You say your husband is a 
rehgious man ; tell him when you meet him, that I say I am 
not much of a judge of religion, but that, in my opinion, 
the religion that sets men to rebel and fight against their 
government, because, as they think, that government does 
not sufficiently help some men to eat their bread in the 
sweat of other men's faces, is not the sort of religion upon 
which people can get to heaven." 

A. Lincoln. 



RESPONSE TO A SERENADE 

December 6, 1864 

Friends and Fellow Citizens : I believe I shall never 
be old enough to speak without embarrassment when I 
have nothing to talk about. I have no good news to tell 
you, and yet I have no bad news to tell. We have talked of 
elections until there is nothing more to say about them. 
The most interesting news we now have is from Sherman. 
We all know where he went in, but I can't tell where he will 
come out. I will now close by proposing three cheers for 
General Sherman and his army. 

LETTER TO GENERAL WILLIAM T. SHERMAN 

The reference is to Sherman's famous "March to the Sea." Lincoln's 
willingness to give all the credit to his generals and their men is characteristic 
of a commander in chief whose freedom from jealousy and from self-seeking 
won for him the loving loyalty of the soldiers. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, December 26, 1864. 

My dear General Sherman : Many, many thanks for 
your Christmas gift, the capture of Savannah. 

When you were about leaving Atlanta for the Atlantic 
coast, I was anxious, if not fearful ; but feeling that you 
were the better judge, and remembering that ''nothing risked, 
nothing gained," I did not interfere. Now, the undertaking 



LETTER TO DR. MACLEAN, 1864 213 

being a success, the honor is all yours ; for I believe none 
of us went further than to acquiesce. j 

And taking the work of General Thomas into the count, 
as it should be taken, it is indeed a great success. Not 
only does it afford the obvious and immediate military ad- 
vantages ; but in showing to the world that your army could 
be divided, putting the stronger part to an important new 
service, and yet leaving enough to vanquish the old opposing 
force of the whole, — Hood's army, — it brings those who sat 
in darkness to see a great light. ^ But what next ^. 

I suppose it will be safe if I leave General Grant and 
yourself to decide. 

Please make my grateful acknowledgments to your whole 

army — officers and men. ^r ^ , 

^ Yours very truly, 

A. Lincoln. 

LETTER TO DR. JOHN MACLEAN 

The degree of Doctor of Laws conferred upon Abraham Lincoln by Prince- 
ton University and by Columbia was a recognition of the learning of the 
author of the Cooper Institute speech and the scholarship which made 
possible the Gettysburg address, but it was most of all a tribute to the wisdom 
of a great servant of the people as proved by his effort to "preserve, protect, 
and defend the Constitution of the United States." 

Executive Mansion, Washington, December 27, 1864. 

My dear Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the 
reception of your note of the 20th of December, conveying 
the announcement that the trustees of the College of New 
Jersey had conferred upon me the degree of Doctor of Laws. 

The assurance conveyed by this high compliment, that the 
course of the government which I represent has received the 
approval of a body of gentlemen of such character and intelli- 
gence, in this time of public trial is most grateful to me. 

Thoughtful men must feel that the fate of civilization 
upon this continent is involved in the issue of our contest. 

1 Quoting Isaiah, ix, 2. 



214 LETTER TO GENERAL GRANT, 1865 

Among the most gratifying proofs of this conviction is the 
hearty devotion everywhere exhibited by our schools and 
colleges to the national cause. 

I am most thankful if my labors have seemed to conduce 
to the preservation of those institutions under which alone 
we can expect good government — and in its train, sound 
learning and the progress of the liberal arts. 

I am, sir, very truly, your obedient servant, 

A. Lincoln. 

LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 

Robert Todd Lincoln, the President's eldest son, received a captain's 
commission in response to this request. In later years he served his country 
with distinction as Secretary of War and Ambassador to Great Britain. 

Executive Mansion, Washington, January 19, 1865. 

Lieutenant General Grant : Please read and answer 

this letter as though I was not President, but only a friend. 

My son, now in his twenty-second year, having graduated at 

Harvard, wishes to see something of the war before it ends. 

I do not wish to put him in the ranks, nor yet to give him a 

commission, to which those who have already served long 

are better entitled, and better quahfied to hold. Could he, 

without embarrassment to you or detriment to the service, 

go into your military family with some nominal rank, I, and 

not the public, furnishing his necessary means t If no, say 

so without the least hesitation, because I am as anxious 

and as deeply interested that you shall not be encumbered 

as you can be yourself. ^ ^ ^ 

■^ ^ Yours truly, 

A. Lincoln. 

THE SECOND INAUGURAL ADDRESS 

March 4, 1865 

Lincoln's own estimate of the second inaugural address is given in his 
letter to Thurlow Weed (p. 217). His expectation, there expressed, has been 
realized. It is doubtful if, with the exception of the Gettysburg address, 



SECOND INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1865 215 

anything has been produced in America that surpasses it in clearness of style, 
in beauty of form, in prophetic vision, or in that "high seriousness" which 
Matthew Arnold deems the essence of poetry. 

The contrast between the occasion and that of the first inaugural is well 
drawn by the speaker. The appearance of the man himself had changed in 
the four years' interval. The lines of his face had deepened, the sunny smile 
that men knew so well had disappeared ; his own sorrows and those of his 
people had left their mark upon him until the look of "other-worldliness" 
had become its dominant expression. Many who watched the speaker 
felt, as Horace Greeley did, "that his life hung by so slender a thread that 
any new access of trouble or excess of effort might suddenly close his career." 

Fellow Countrymen : At this second appearing to take 
the oath of the presidential office, there is less occasion for 
an extended address than there was at the first. Then a 
statement, somewhat in detail, of a course to be pursued, 
seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four 
years, during which public declarations have -been con- 
stantly called forth on every point and phase of the great 
contest which still absorbs the attention and engrosses the 
energies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. 
The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly de- 
pends, is as well known to the public as to myself; and it 
is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. 
With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it 
is ventured. 

On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago, all 
thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. 
All dreaded it — all sought to avert it. While the inaugural 
address was being delivered from this place, devoted alto- 
gether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents 
were in the city seeking to destroy it without war — seeking 
to dissolve the Union, and divide eff'ects, by negotiation. 
Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make 
war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would 
accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came. 

One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, 
not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in 



2l6 SECOND INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 1865 

the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar 
and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, 
somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, 
and extend this interest was the object for which the insur- 
gents would rend the Union, even by war ; while the govern- 
ment claimed no right to do more than to restrict the terri- 
torial enlargement of it. 

Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the 
duration which it has already attained. Neither antici- 
pated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even 
before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an 
easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astound- 
ing. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God ; 
and each invokes his aid against the other. It may seem 
strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assist- 
ance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's 
faces; but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The 
prayers of both could not be answered — that of neither has 
been answered fully. 

The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the 
world because of offenses ! for it must needs be that offenses 
come ; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." 
If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those 
offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, 
but which, having continued through his appointed time, he 
now wills to remove, and that he gives to both North and 
South this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the 
offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from 
those divine attributes which the believers in a living God 
always ascribe to him .^ Fondly do we hope — fervently do 
we pray — that this mighty scourge of war may speedily 
pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the 
wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years 
of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood 
drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the 
sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must 



LETTER TO THURLOW WEED, 1865 21 7 

be said, "The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous 
altogether." 

With mahce toward none; with charity for all; with 
firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us 
strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the na- 
tion's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the 
battle, and for his widow, and his orphan — to do all which 
may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among 
ourselves, and with all nations. 



LETTER TO THURLOW WEED 
Executive Mansion, Washington, March 15, 1865. 
Dear Mr. Weed : Every one hkes a compliment. 
Thank you for yours on my little notification speech and 
on the recent inaugural address. I expect the latter to 
wear as well as — perhaps better than — anything I have 
produced; but I beheve it is not immediately popular. 
Men are not flattered by being shown that there has been 
a difference of purpose between the Almighty and them. 
To deny it, however, in this case, is to deny that there is a 
God governing the world. It is a truth which I thought 
needed to be told, and, as whatever of humiliation there is 
in it falls most directly on myself, I thought others might 
afford for me to tell it. 

Truly yours, 

A. Lincoln. 



THE LAST PUBLIC SPEECH 

April II, 1865 

This outline of Lincoln's views as to how best to restore to their proper 
relations with the Union the states whose attempted secession had at last 
been made impossible, was prepared with great care and read by the President 
from one of the windows of the White House. As he read he dropped the 
sheets of paper to the floor, and little Tad, his father's constant comrade. 



21 8 LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 

scrambled over the floor, picking them up and eagerly calling out for " 'nother 
paper." Three days later Abraham Lincoln's death ended all possibility 
of realizing his cherished plans for a peaceable reconstruction of the 
Southern states. 

Fellow Citizens : We meet this evening, not in sorrow, 
but in gladness of heart. The evacuation of Petersburg 
and Richmond, and the surrender of th^ principal insur- 
gent army, give hope of a righteous and speedy peace, whose 
joyous expression cannot be restrained. In the midst of 
this, however, He from whom all blessings flow must not be 
forgotten. A call for a national thanksgiving is being pre- 
pared, and will be duly promulgated. Nor must those 
whose harder part give us the cause of rejoicing be over- 
looked. Their honors must not be parceled out with others. 
I myself was near the front, and had the high pleasure of 
transmitting much of the good news to you ; but no part of 
the honor for plan or execution is mine. To General Grant, 
his skillful oflRcers and brave men, all belongs. The gallant 
navy stood ready, but was not in reach to take active part. 

By these recent successes the reinauguration of the na- 
tional authority — reconstruction — which has had a large 
share of thought from the first, is pressed much more closely 
upon our attention. It is fraught with great difficulty. 
Unlike a case of war between independent nations, there is 
no organized organ for us to treat with — no one man has 
authority to give up the rebellion for any other man. We 
simply must begin with and mold from disorganized and dis- 
cordant elements. Nor is it a small additional embarrass- 
ment that we, the loyal people, differ among ourselves as to 
the mode, manner, and measure of reconstruction. As a 
general rule, I abstain from reading the reports of attacks 
upon myself, wishing not to be provoked by that to which 
I cannot properl}^ offer an answer. In spite of this precau- 
tion, however, it comes to my knowledge that I am much 
censured for some supposed agency in setting up and seeking 
to sustain the new state government of Louisiana. 



LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1S65 219 

In this I have done just so much, and no more than, 
the pubHc knows. In the annual message of December, 
1863, and in the accompanying proclamation, I presented 
a plan of reconstruction, as the phrase goes, which I prom- 
ised, if adopted by any state, should be acceptable to and 
sustained by the executive government of the nation. I 
distinctly stated that this was not the only plan which might 
possibly be acceptable, and I also distinctly protested that 
the executive claimed no right to say when or whether 
members should be admitted to seats in Congress from such 
states. This plan was in advance submitted to the then 
cabinet, and distinctly approved by every member of it. 
One of them suggested that I should then in that connection 
apply the Emancipation Proclamation to the theretofore 
excepted parts of Virginia and Louisiana ; that I should 
drop the suggestion about apprenticeship for freed people, 
and that I should omit the protest against my own power 
in regard to the admission of members to Congress. 
But even he approved every part and parcel of the plan 
which has since been employed or touched by the action of 
Louisiana. 

The new constitution of Louisiana, declaring emancipa- 
tion for the whole state, practically applies the proclamation 
to the part previously excepted. It does not adopt appren- 
ticeship for freed people, and it is silent, as it could not well 
be otherwise, about the admission of members to Congress. 
So that, as it applies to Louisiana, every member of the cabi- 
net fully approved the plan. The message went to Congress, 
and I received many commendations of the plan, written 
and verbal, and not a single objection to it from any pro- 
fessed emancipationist came to my knowledge until after 
the news reached Washington that the people of Louisiana 
had begun to move in accordance with it. From about July, 
1862, I had corresponded with different persons supposed to 
be interested [in] seeking a reconstruction of a state govern- 
ment for Louisiana. When the message of 1863, with the 



220 LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 

plan before mentioned, reached New Orleans, General Banks 
wrote me that he was confident that the people, with his 
military cooperation, would reconstruct substantially on 
that plan. I wrote to him and some of them to try it. They 
tried it, and the result is known. Such has been my only 
agency in getting up the Louisiana government. 

As to sustaining it, my promise is out, as before stated. 
But as bad promises are better broken than kept, I shall 
treat this as a bad promise, and break it whenever I shall 
be convinced that keeping it is adverse to pubhc interest ; 
but I have not yet been so convinced. I have been shown 
a letter on this subject, supposed to be an able one, in which 
the writer expresses regret that my mind has not seemed 
to be definitely fixed upon the question whether the seceded 
states, so called, are in the Union or out of it. It would 
perhaps add astonishment to his regret were he to learn that 
since I have found professed Union men endeavoring to 
make that question, I have purposely forborne any public 
expression upon it. As appears to me, that question has 
not been, nor yet is, a practically material one, and that any 
discussion of it, while it thus remains practically immaterial, 
could have no effect other than the mischievous one of 
dividing our friends. As yet, whatever it may hereafter 
become, that question is bad as the basis of a controversy, 
and good for nothing at all — a merely pernicious abstrac- 
tion. 

We all agree that the seceded states, so called, are out of 
their proper practical relation with the Union, and that the 
sole object of the government, civil and military, in regard 
to those states, is to again get them into that proper practical 
relation. I beheve that it is not only possible, but in fact 
easier, to do this without deciding or even considering whether 
these states have ever been out of the Union, than with it. 
Finding themselves safely at home, it would be utterly im- 
material whether they had ever been abroad. Let us all 
join in doing the acts necessary to restoring the proper prac- 



LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 221 

tical relations between these states and the Union, and each 
forever after innocently indulge his own opinion whether 
in doing the acts he brought the states from without into 
the Union, or only gave them proper assistance, they never 
having been out of it. The amount of constituency, so to 
speak, on which the new Louisiana government rests, would 
be more satisfactory to all if it contained 50,000, or 30,000, 
or even 20,000, instead of only about 12,000 as it does. It is 
also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is 
not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it 
were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those 
who serve our cause as soldiers. 

Still, the question is not whether the Louisiana govern- 
ment, as it stands, is quite all that is desirable. The ques- 
tion is, will it be wiser to take it as it is and help to improve 
it, or to reject and disperse it .^ Can Louisiana be brought 
into proper practical relation with the Union sooner by sus- 
taining or by discarding her new state government ^. Some 
twelve thousand voters in the heretofore slave state of 
Louisiana have sworn allegiance to the Union, assumed to be 
the rightful political powxr of the state, held elections, or- 
ganized a state government, adopted a free-state constitu- 
tion, giving the benefit of public schools equally to black 
and white, and empowering the legislature to confer the 
elective franchise upon the colored man. Their legislature 
has already voted to ratify the constitutional amendment 
recently passed by Congress, abolishing slavery throughout 
the nation. These twelve thousand persons are thus fully 
committed to the Union and to perpetual freedom in the state 
— committed to the very things, and nearly all the things, 
the nation wants — and they ask the nation's recognition 
and its assistance to make good their committal. 

Now, if we reject and spurn them, we do our utmost to 
disorganize and disperse them. We, in effect, say to the 
white man : You are worthless or worse ; we will neither 
help you, nor be helped by you. To the blacks, we say : 



222 LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1865 

This cup of liberty, which these, your old masters, hold to 
your lips, we will dash from you, and leave you to the 
chances of gathering the spilled and scattered contents in 
some vague and undefined when, where, and how. If this 
course, discouraging and paralyzing both white and black, 
has any tendency to bring Louisiana into proper, practical 
relations with the Union, I have so far been unable to per- 
ceive it. If, on the contrary, we recognize and sustain the 
new government of Louisiana, the converse of all this is made 
true. We encourage the hearts and nerve the arms of twelve 
thousand to adhere to their work, and argue for it, and pros- 
elyte for it, and fight for it, and feed it, and grow it, and 
ripen it to a complete success. The colored man, too, in 
seeing all united for him, is inspired with vigilance, and en- 
ergy, and daring to the same end. Grant that he desires 
the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving 
the already advanced steps toward it than by running back- 
ward over them ? Concede that the new government of 
Louisiana is only to what it should be as the egg is to the 
fowl, we shall sooner have the fowl by hatching the egg 
than by smashing it. 

Again, if we reject Louisiana, we also reject one vote in 
favor of the proposed amendment to the national Consti- 
tution. To meet this proposition it has been argued that 
no more than three fourths of those states which have not 
attempted secession are necessary to validly ratify the 
amendment. I do not commit myself against this further 
than to say that such a ratification would be questionable, 
and sure to be persistently questioned, while a ratification 
by three fourths of all the states would be unquestioned and 
unquestionable. I repeat the question : Can Louisiana be 
brought into proper practical relation with the Union sooner 
by sustaining or by discarding her new state government ? 
What has been said of Louisiana will apply generally to other 
states. And yet so great peculiarities pertain to each state, 
and such important and sudden changes occur in the same 



LAST PUBLIC SPEECH, 1S65 223 

state, and withal so new and unprecedented is the whole case, 
that no exclusive and inflexible plan can safely be prescribed 
as to details and collaterals. Such exclusive and inflexible 
plan would surely become a new entanglement. Important 
principles may and must be inflexible. In the present situa- 
tion, as the phrase goes, it may be my duty to make some 
new announcement to the* people of the South. I am con- 
sidering, and shall not fail to act when satisfied that action 
will be proper. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Andrews, Mary R. S. The Counsel Assigned. The Perfect Tribute. 

Scribner. 
Arnold, Isaac N. Life of Abraham Lincoln. McClurg. 
Bates, David Homer. Lincoln in the Telegraph Office. Century. 
Beecher, Henry Ward. Addresses in England, iS6j. 
Binns, Henry Bryan. Abraha?n Lincoln. E. P. Duttcn. 
Browne, Francis F. Everyday Life of Lincoln. Browne and 

Howell. 
Carpenter, F. B. Six Months in the White House. Houghton Mifflin. 
Carr, Clark E. Lincoln at Gettysburg. McClurg. 
Hapgood, Norman. Abraham Lincoln, The Man of the People. 

Macmillan. 
Herndon,W. H., and Weik, Jesse W. Abraham Lincoln. D.Appleton. 
Hill, Frederick Trevor. Lincoln the Lawyer. Century. 
Holland, Josiah Gilbert. Life of Abraham Lificohi. 
Ketcham, Henry. Life of Abraham Lincoln. Burt. 
Lowell, James Russell. Commemoration Ode. Essay on Lincoln. 

Houghton Mifflin. 
Miller, Marion Mills. The Wisdom of Abraham Lincoln. Wessels. 
Moores, Charles W. Life of Abraham Lincoln for Boys and Girls. 

Houghton Mifflin. 
Morgan, James. Abraham Lincoln, The Boy and The Man. Mac- 
millan. 
Morse, John T., Jr. Abraham Lincoln. Houghton Mifflin. 
Nicolay, John G. A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln. Century. 
Nicolay, John G., and Hay, John. Abraha^n Lincoln, a History. 

Writings and Speeches of Abraham Lincoln. Century. 
Rice, Allen Thorndike. Reminiscences of Lincoln. Harpers. 
Schurz, Carl. Abraham Lincoln. 

Tarbell, Ida M. Life of Abraham Lincoln. Macmillan. 
Whipple, Wayne. The Story-Life of Lincoln. Winston. 
Whitlock, Brand. Abraham Lincoln. Small, Maynard. 
Whitman, Walt. Captain, My Captain. When Lilacs last in 

the Dooryard Bloomed. 

224 




Hi! 



